User talk:JeremyA/Archive08

DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.

This archive page covers approximately the dates between 22 February 2007 and 25 May 2007.

Post replies to the main talk page, copying the section you are replying to if necessary. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.)

Thank you. Jeremy (talk) 22:14, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Previous archive page: User talk:JeremyA/Archive07.
Next archive page: User talk:JeremyA/Archive09.

All images I uploaded have been deleted,Sum 2101 (talk · contribs)

Hi, As I'm a new here, I wonder whether the images from the Internet I upload should be delete by wiki administrators unless I indicate the license and the source of the image ,but I really can't find the information of the some images, I just want to share the beautiful images with wiki members, that's it. And hope you can take a little time to give me a reply, Thanks.

Once more, Lewisskinner (talk · contribs)

Hi Jeremy, I still can't find a sensible place to report Lewis as he has once more chosen to use profanity to express himself. This is not the first, nor the second time this has happened. I am asking you to look into this seriously so as to not be the recipient of such language from the user. I have for a long time thrived to apply to rules and when such rules are repeatedly broken I have repeatedly reported them, the latest wave of ill-language happened here: User_talk:Lewisskinner#Speedy_deletion_of_Image:Bramall_Lane_plan.JPG, please sort him out. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 20:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Greg. Whilst it is clearly preferable for people to engage in mature and intelligent discussion, there is (so far as I am aware) no explicit ban on the use of profanity on Wikipedia talk pages. So there is not much that I can do about the language that you point to above. I don't perceive Lewis's edit as a direct personal attack on you, even if it does show that he misunderstands the purpose of talk pages. As for more general relations between you and Lewis, I watch both of your talk pages, so I am aware that the two of you don't get along. However, I think that I would be abusing my admin powers if I were to intervene in any stronger way than I have already (although I would use blocks if I saw any more direct personal attacks).

I don't think that it has gone this far yet, but you might want to consider some of the options described at Wikipedia:Resolving disputes. But at the moment I suggest that you try not to rise to the bait—as an admin I have had much worse personal attacks made against me (take a look at the history of my user page), the secret is just to ignore them. You may also find that it is better if you try to avoid entering into discussions with Lewis for a while—other editors will eventually spot and correct copyright problems or poor editing (even if it sometimes takes longer than you would like). You will remember that some of the early encounters between you and I were not exactly amicable, but I hope that you will agree that we are able to work well together now. —JeremyA 22:46, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for the pointers. Yes we weren't best of friends at first, but I don't think we went the way of colourful language ;) It's just getting boring, we must be on the third, maybe fourth instance if this happening, and I've sen contributors get vasectomy for less :D Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 23:06, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I feel bad for passing the buck so to speak, however, I feel uncomfortable mediating between you and Lewis because you both edit pages that I frequently edit and admins are encouraged not to use admin powers in disputes related to articles that they themselves are editors of (I know that I am sometimes guilty of ignoring this advice). So here is another suggestion: as I am quite close to this situation the opinion of another admin may have more weight with Lewis than my opinion. Admins are not police, and are supposed to avoid mediating in disputes, but you may find another admin who is prepared to look at specific examples and see if another warning, or even a block is appropriate. Within Wikiproject:Sheffield Warofdreams is also an admin, and other admins can be found at Wikipedia:List of administrators. I would recommend Splash, but he appears to have not edited much recently. There is also a sparsely populated category of English admins, of whom Celestianpower is the name I recognise most. —JeremyA 00:00, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, where the hell are the pages for I've been insulted and I want a user to be disciplined/warned thing... There's NPA, Profanity help page, but nothing I can find to report and have a case assessed. I usually turn to you because I know you, but do not expect you to take action since it would incredibly one sided. The situation as it is is ridiculous, Lewis basically insults me once every couple of weeks, and there's no recourse I can follow to prevent him from doing so. Congrats to Warofdreams for his Adminship, last time I checked, he wasn't one. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 19:21, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I have just stumbled across this in looking for you regarding something else.

May I explain that the responses in question were not insulting to any one person. Profanity, yes, but it was on my own user talk page! All I meant was to ask both Captain Scarlet and Pc1dmn not to use my talk page for a petty argument.

I would like to ask the Captain why he seems to think that every edit I make is an insult to him, but it usually either deteriorates into an arguement or he ignores me. Indeed, he has ignored my previous sensible requests and suggestions. L.J.Skinner^{wot|I did} 03:19, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Petty? How dare you sir ... my seconds + any available Mysterons will be outside Sheff Med School at dawn tomorrow. Ars longa, etc. -- roundhouse 09:45, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(so that JeremyA sees this) Pc1dmn and I were certain not arguying, we came up with a new product (an image, now uploaded to the Commons). This petition had the sole reason of existing because of your repeated use of swearing and profanity. This petition does bare the title Once more, Lewisskinner (talk · contribs)' symbolising the repitition of this petition thus the repetition of your unwiki-like behaviour which is to this date unchanged. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 10:24, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May I first of all say that the response above by Pc1dmn are more in keeping with the kind I expect here. Witty, good-natured and he/she does not immediately assuming he/she is being attacked. May I ask why yet again you respond to myself in this way Captain? You catch more bees with honey than with vinegar.

Now, regarding the image deletion: I had thought I'd changed google maps enough, but clearly not (a misunderstanding of policy of my part) - and I was willing to accept the image deletion, hence I did not repspond (I had and have not seen the new product by the way. By all means, use it if you feel it is superior!) But, (as I stated), this was my own talk page. The place for a discussion of the kind you to were having would be Talk:Bramall_Lane. My talk page is not for personal attacks on users such as "I suppose it was predictable that the Mysterons would intervene" or "i suggest you polish your understanding of Wikipedia policies before intervening", so please. WP:NPA, but if you must, use the article's talk page, not mine, that was all I was syaing. L.J.Skinner^{wot|I did} 15:51, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Avoiding double spacing after a full stop, I'll point out that this chain of messages was initiated following your outrageous behaviour Lewsskinner. The image deletion was done according to procedure and after upload of copyrighted media. No one assumed anything more than what was written and the S word said it all really, so did the F word the time before... No one personnally attacked but, only warning messages concerning your behaviour, not you, were left by myself. Warning you of your beaking of the rules does usually grant you a free linking to WP:Help whilst not passing by Go. I'll respond condescentely every time you choose to use profanity as a means of communications, for your eyes only, the new product I uploaded can be seen demonstrated here in supermarionation. Now I believe we are taking JeremyA's talk page hostable with this banter so I leave it at this. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 17:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you destroy Gleam the hedgehog?

Why did you destroy Gleam the hedgehog? My entire idea for my world was focused on him. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gleamthehedgehog (talk • contribs) 02:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

user:Bluedevil04

I saw you edit vandalism from this user on the Middlesbrough F.C. page. I'd like to point you towards the fact that he's made similar edits to Reading F.C., Sheffield United F.C. and Manchester United F.C. just judging by his talk page - more looking at his contribs page. L.J.Skinner^{wot|I did} 02:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wowturkey images

Hi, did you ever get it sorted out with wowturkey images or do you still need help with translation of the policy of the site? Let me know if you do. --Free smyrnan 22:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I replied on the WPTR page. If the logo is there, the images are available for use. If the logo is removed, they ask for requesting permission etc. --Free smyrnan 12:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the interwiki Bot of User:STBotD

I found this interwiki in the article Anga. But this interwiki is total wrong. In german wikipedia this interwiki Hanga (Sprache) means an article for an african language and in english wikipedia this article is part of hindu history. So can there be more than only a mistake...maybe a chaotic bot or a vandal bot. I write you, because i just elect an admin from the adminlist. GLGerman 23:43, 12 March 2007 (UTC) http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Anga&diff=95286020&oldid=92890904[reply]

Sheffield FAC

Thanks, but I was hoping for wider revision than just the addressing of the examples I listed. Perhaps you can find a good copy-editor who's unfamiliar with the topic. Tony 07:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CHICOTW New Nominee

	Chicago Collaboration of the Week
Last week you helped edit the Chicago COTW, but did not vote. Thank you for your help! Your input in future selections would also be appreciated. This week The Second City has been chosen. Please help improve it towards the quality level of a Wikipedia featured article. See the To Do List to suggest a change or to see an open tasks list.
	Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago

TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 00:31, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Piggly Wiggly

Here's the deal: I saw a reference on the Porky Pig page that made the speculative claim that Porky looked a lot like the pig from Piggly Wiggly, which appeared to be true, but I wanted to see which one came first, so I went from the Piggly Wiggly article to Piggly Wiggly's own website and realized that nearly the entire wikipedia article was lifted directly from the Piggly Wiggly site. In addition to finding no new information, I backed up, and into the irony that some idiot had put an "unreferenced" tag on the page. PIGGLY WIGGLY IS THE REFERENCE!!! Now do you get it? Wahkeenah 23:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I took a somewhat toned-down approach. I removed the "unreferenced" tag, which is obviously not true, and in the link to the Piggly Wiggly site I pointed out that that is the source for most of the article's history section, if not the whole thing. If you really want to encourage laziness in others, I could copy their history onto the talk page and save someone a mouse click or two. Wahkeenah 23:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for fixing. Unfortunately, that returns the "unreferenced" tag to the page. A compromise approach would be to summarize the history page and point out explicitly that this is where it comes from. That would cover all the bases, presumably. Wahkeenah 18:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Just got your message. Understood. Wahkeenah 00:48, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Goodbye

Dear Jeremy, after a year and a half of great work together, it is now time to say goodbye to you and the project. I do not like the direction Wikipedia and its members are taking and do not wish to continue on the course adding filth to articles. It is now time to let you and your friends implement this filth in peace without me ruining your work towards world domination of infobox paradise. I have voiced my hatred of infoboxes in the past and see that I have little weight in the decisions made by the project I once proposed for creation, I give my place in project to Pit-Yacker, Jhamez and MRSC who are making such a better job than me to make Wikipedia a boring and uniform contentless collection of nothingness. Thanks for the great help in this time. Cheers, Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 17:58, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Given that I have actually supported your position in relation to the use of the UK place infobox in articles on Sheffield districts I find your comments strange. —JeremyA (talk) 19:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[1] [2] [3] [4]. Given your claims at supporting my position, I find your contributions strange, if not contradictory. I am one faced, I said I hate the template, I simply do... I've worked with you all these months, if our interests diverge, there is little point in continuing to work together. I've also received little reaction on your side concerning the Commons... Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 19:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1) Treeton is not a district of Sheffield 2) a map is not an infobox. —JeremyA (talk) 19:16, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Treeton is near Sheffield, our discussions in the past have led us to maintain articles south Yorkshire-wide. The map is made to feature in the infobox, [5] is the implementation of the infobox. Regardless of Treeton being in Sheffield or not, I do not approve of this template's existence, let alone its implementation, regardless of the articles it is in. I have put too much time into Wikipedia to be happy with the ruining of articles by this pityful template, hence my resignation from all collaborative work projects. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 19:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so you are pissed off at me because I took a map that someone else had made, calibrated it, played with it in my own user space, and then swapped it in place of a UK map in an article that I am >90% the author of (one that you have never edited) so that I could see what it would look like; all the while stating that, as it stands, I see no place for the UK infobox template in Sheffield district articles. Like I said, I find that strange. —JeremyA (talk) 19:40, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am annoyed at you and the UK Infobox gang for implementing their template. While you see no place for the template in Sheffield districts articles I see no place for it anywhere, even on Treeton where I haven't contributed. Since the beginning of their project their contributions have been nothing but imposing and borderline rude. My aggassement was not generated by your use of Jhamez' map, but by the use of the template, although I do have reservations on the map itself. You played with it on your userspace; fine. Its implementation is what I believe is anti WPsheffield, the core of what the members believed in is tossed aside and ignored. Now Jhamez is on another whim and implenting the map and furthe rmodifications to this pirate template upon all of South Yorkshire? Since the values of the WPsheffield seem to have changed while mine haven't, I do not see why I should continue collaborating. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 20:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Values? When we created WP:SHEFF the only mission statement written was "Some Wikipedians have formed a project to better organize information in articles related to Sheffield... it is hoped that this project will help to focus the efforts of other Wikipedians." The only value that I see there is to provide a place to help multiple authors better collaborate on a given set of articles. Regardless of anyones feelings about the map, how is allowing everyone to see what the map looks like in action not helping that collaboration?

With respect to the infobox on articles unrelated to Sheffield, say Brighton. There is something to be said for pragmatism—I don't think that the infobox is perfect but it is what we have; consensus among other Wikipedians appears to be to use it, so the most pragmatic approach is to try to make it better. My opinion is that the SY map makes it better for the likes of the Treeton article. Collaboration is about give and take—sometimes things go your way sometimes they don't. The test of anyone's character is how they react when things don't go their way—I choose conceding graciously, picking myself up and carrying on over taking my ball and going home. —JeremyA (talk) 20:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Baring [6] in mind, I don't see how we can agree Jeremy. There has been no give and take here, just take-take-take, I'd like to take sometimes you know. Regardless of the map being lisible, it does not need the template for it to feature. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 22:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's called seeking the middle ground! Exactly what in that message that I left for Jhamez leads you to any other conclusions? You are seeing attacks where none exist. I can summarise the message for you; it says "Infobox A was deleted supposedly because Infobox B could do the same job, please show me how?". You should also note that I stated that I was perfectly happy for Sheffield districts to have no infobox. But, given that some did previously have one, I have been playing around with various options—nothing with any intent of going 'live' with anything, just looking to see if I can find something that I like better than the currently preferred 'no map or infobox' solution. I am perfectly entitled to do this in my own sandbox, I am also perfectly entitled to ask other users for help if I come across a particular problem in one of the variants that I try. —JeremyA (talk) 22:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're being defensive and trying to justify yourself, I haven't yet said I disagreed with tests in your sandbox, there is no need to be territorial. This thread was intended to inform you of my actions, I'm not seeking your advice, our disagreements have reached a point where i cannot see collaboration as being an option anymore. Since the WPSheff has no authority, no power, no right to make decisions, there is little need for it. Furthermore since I believe we disagree and have taken different paths, as two founding members of the project I see not how we could collaborate effectively within the WP structure. finally, the first step to take a Wikipedian's actions is good faith, when harm is felt, the next step is bad faith, the reaso I do not wish to collaborate in any way with Jhamez and his Infobox friends, I do not see a single good thing arising from their actions. Good faith is good for dumping on talk pages as a warning, after weeks of discussions it is entirely natural to act upon the behaviour of others, don't be so diplomatic Jeremy, take a stance, I have and that is the eradication of the template. Quote: Our revenge will be sloooow but nonetheless effective, don't take it word for word, it's just a quote. I could quote the Doors too... Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 09:11, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sheffield

Hi! Thanks for the contact! And... thanks for working with the South Yorkshire graphic to make the dynamic map, I really appreciate it.

With regards to the infobox, in short, yes! UK cities are meant to use the modern infobox (Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham) if they form a local government district at the same time. There was a plan to convert them all, but it seems some cities have been overlooked - I'll see what I can do for Leeds and other places.

With regards to the traditional counties folk, well, the UK geography WikiProject guidelines as well as the British counties Naming conventions insist we use the contemporary county system for several reasons - (legal literature, approach taken by other encyclopedias, primary sources, local government literature, European guidlines, contemporary mapping, usefulness to readers etc) - the consensus has been formed in the conventions already and they shouldn't be hijacking the article in that way. Also, every article I've seen about a settlement in South Yorkshire, states South Yorkshire within the first few words - I don't see why Sheffield should be treated unlike any other, the north of England has no legal status or clearly defined geographic frame. Jhamez84 19:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, unitary, metropolitan and non-metropolitan districts are supposed to use this template - Metropolitan Borough of Oldham is one, as is Warrington. I know there are others around somewhere.

A description of how you worked out the South Yorkshire settings would be great! Template_talk:Infobox UK place have a section there....... (sorry you've posted there already(!)). I'll use this approach on the other maps. The West Midlands map (Dudley) is one in desperate need of a fix!

I've also left some comment at the Sheffield talk page regarding WP:CITIES; it may be of interest to yourself. Jhamez84 19:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's an interesting infobox if I'm honest. I have no major concerns with it personally, particularly if an article is only a stub. Though, applying critical thinking theory, I could see that adopting that approach may raise a few points of conflict, if not in Sheffield, then certainly elsewhere in the UK.....

Specifically; When does a district become a settlement and vice-versa? What literature is there that verifies a place is a suburb of another (WP:NOR)? What if a ward does not correlate with a district or settlement and vice-versa? What about international context? Does one assume all dial and postal codes in Sheffield are the same? Does everybody share a Sheffield wide identity? Is this approach useful for children, the impaired and foreign readers?

It also misses out other outputs which may be more useful locally, such as OS grid reference, population total and population density.

To try to sell the UK infobox back to yourself, how about it's use in the small disticts/suburbs/wards of Hollinwood, Ancoats, High Crompton, Broughton, Manchester City Centre (please forgive my Greater Manchester knowledge bias)? - in these, warding, grid references, postal towns and codes are all different, and giving a nationwide-consistent breakdown of services and land-division for each, despite them forming part of the same city-region.

Contrary to Paul Metcalfe, I didn't actually create or even conceptualise the UK infobox; I've just had a hand in a few of the straw polls and drawn up some maps that I thought would be right steps forwards. I suppose consensus would have to be obtained to re-adopt a local template, though I suspect it could face opposition, as, as honourable this version may be, Cornish, Northern Irish and Scottish nationalists may do the same to refork politial adgendas. Your thoughts? Jhamez84 22:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the only option is to put it to a straw poll. Though, I think the changes you suggest would broadly reinvent the Sheffield place infobox which was deleted, and thus I suspect the consensus would be sweeping to make use of the UK wide infobox to move articles forwards. Jhamez84 23:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to drop in, but could I direct you both to Template talk:Infobox UK place#Suburbs where I have suggested a possible solution for the whole of the UK? Regan123 23:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Satellite photos etc.

Hello Jeremy, What do you think - [7] cheers, Wikityke 16:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxes for suburbs

Thanks for the note; I hadn't realised that there was an ongoing discussion on this; I'll leave off until a consensus is reached on what to do. Warofdreams talk 16:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative of SY map

That's fantastic! I'm more than happy to see these maps used in this way (particularly for ancient/alternative geographic reference frames placed against modern boundaries), and I'm really impressed with this Hallamshire version.

I have released all my maps to the public domain, so its no problem at all, though it is nice for the contact of courtesy of course.

The map you've produced is very simillar to the amended maps I've made for Saddleworth, Salfordshire, and the London postal district articles, amongst others.

I still intend to make maps for West Yorkshire and Merseyside (I may do this over the weekend), though if you need a hand with these, or know of a request for a simillar kind of map, please feel free to contact me.

Thanks again, kindest regards, Jhamez84 00:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--PS. Was Hallamshire a Wapentake/Hundred? I've requested that these ancient county divisions get an infobox, as many are poping up and/or maturing. Jhamez84 00:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is curious that it is Hallam-shire. It makes me suspect that it had an administrative role (possibly ecclesiastic?), though it's just my personal speculation of course.

It also doesn't appear on the Parishes of the West Riding map; so it clearly wasn't a parish, at least at that map's production time.

Regardless, I think it's great you've pooled together a large body of research for the article. Some of these Sheffield related articles are superb. I'm also keen on your suggestions at the infobox UK place talk page with regards to WikiProjects - it would be great to revitalise some of these. Jhamez84 22:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that User:Ddstretch is leading the way in making some (positive) changes to the UK Wiki structing. He has my support, and I'll certainly be more than happy to contact the various WikiProjects to pass comment or raise their objections. I'm rather excited that at last some progress is being made to really improve these articles!

With regards to your tests, I'm afraid that that level of syntax is beyond my editting capabilities (which is incredibly frustrating to me and I'm keen on producing infoboxes). I'm of little help for that kind of work, so probably best to raise this at the ~~main UK geography~~, UK infobox place talk page. < I jest of course. Jhamez84 00:00, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Crookes

Hello Jeremy, The limitation of the Lat./ Long. item in the template is that it doesn't allow a scale factor. (see discussion at http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Template_talk:Infobox_UK_place#coor_template ). Cheers, Wikityke 16:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

West Yorkshire map

Hello again,

Your response to aid with the map calibrations was unbelievebly fast! Thank you so much! Your tests appear to be wholly accurate, and already suitable for a mainspace upload!

I intend to create a Merseyside county map next, then possibly address some of the issues being raised at the Infobox UK place talk page with regards to South-South Yorkshire.

User:MRSC was the original architect for the infobox, though his involvement has reduced with each passing week. I'm keen to get this infobox rolled out across the UK so the collective of editors can move on to other possible projects, such as the ones we've discussed.

Once again, thanks for the map settings; I'm sure thousands of readers will be eternally greatful. Jhamez84 00:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading a file...

Hello Jeremy:

If you see the licensing of the image on this page http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Image:ATB-SevenYears.jpg, it states that the "image is of a cover of an audio recording, and the copyright for it is most likely owned by either the publisher of the album or the artist(s) which produced the recording or cover artwork in question. It is believed that the use..."

If that uploader could upload that image, why can't I do the same?

I want to upload an image of a cover of an audio recording... so what license do I have to choose?

What did that uploader do to upload the same thing I want to upload?

What do I have to do to get this message in my uploaded cover image?

"This image is of a cover of an audio recording, and the copyright for it is most likely owned by either the publisher of the album or the artist(s) which produced the recording or cover artwork in question. It is believed that the use of low-resolution images of such covers

solely to illustrate the audio recording in question, on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Any other uses of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement. See Wikipedia:Fair use for more information.

To the uploader: please add a detailed fair use rationale for each use, as described on Wikipedia:Image description page, as well as the source of the work and copyright information."

Thanks for your time and your patience.

Re: Uploading file

Hi again:

Can you just tell me what I have to choose (license) when I am ready to upload my file?

It's just an image of a cover of a audio recording, like this one http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Image:ATB-SevenYears.jpg.

So, if what I want to do has already done, like the link above, why can't I do it?

What license do I have to choose? Please tell me. Just that!

Thanks again for your time and your patience. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ronald26 (talk • contribs) 02:54, 10 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Derbyshire map

Hi! The map is truly outstanding! You've replicated the style with ease!

I've been able to save the file and swap the colours of the motorways to RGB Blue (R:0, G:0, B:255), and then dulled the parts outside of Derbyshire using the eraser tool at 27% Opacity.

I'll upload it upon your file name, but if you have any objections, you can revert of course. I've noticed though that the map appears to miss rivers and water bodies out. Do you know if there are any major ones that ought to be included? - I use the exact blue found on the UK map for the sea and generally use Goggle Earth as a reference.

I have no objections to any help with drawing maps up; quite the contrary! I would be more than happy to have multiple-user support. I am making the Merseyside map currently, and after that I'm not entirely sure.

Thanks again however, to say there were no instructions, you've mangaged this with ease. Jhamez84 11:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, your version is in the Wikipedia Commons. I'll add my version to Wikipedia, sorry. Jhamez84 11:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic! Thank you so much! This infobox project is really taking off here! Jhamez84 22:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History of Sheffield

Congratulations; your great work on this article has been recognised as it has become featured. I'm still planning significant changes in line with my objections during the RfA, but want to wait until I have sufficiently strong references that it will stand up to the excellent standard of the current text. On a different topic, the Derbyshire map looks fantastic; are you planning maps of any other counties? Warofdreams talk 23:34, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From a Sheffield point of view, I'd be particularly keen to see Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire; from a national point of view, the most populous counties such as Kent, Essex and Hampshire might be most appreciated (and Essex in particular has some tricky coastline to draw). I wonder whether there would be support for a map of the Western Isles or other Scottish island groups? Warofdreams talk 00:47, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

UK Infobox - county maps

I notice that you've been working on one or two of these. I've set up a progress and "to do" table at Template talk:Infobox UK place/maps#English County Maps. Please add any that you are working on. Thanks Richard B 13:41, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Surrey

Great work again. I wonder if you could look at Godalming on the map? It looks like rather too much of it is shown over the border in Guildford borough. Meanwhile, Ash, Ash Vale and Mytchett could perhaps be shown as part of the Farnham-Aldershot-Camberley conurbation, to emphasise that it effectively extends into Surrey here, too. A couple of minor things: the inclusion of the Mole might help location in the middle of the county, and I wonder if one or both of the big reservoirs up near the Thames at Molesey would be big enough to show? Keep up the good work, Warofdreams talk 00:04, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That looks spot on to me, now. thanks, Warofdreams talk 02:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tinsley Viaduct

Hi there JeremyA/Archive08. I see you have edited the above article, I'd like to invite you to a poll on the inclusion or not of the coordinates box, here. L.J.Skinner^{wot|I did} 02:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Center for Neighborhood Technology

Hi JeremyA,

I was wondering why the link to Chicago Life was taken off the Center for Neighborhood Technology. This was an interview with The Center for Neighborhood Technology. This entry barely has anything on it and this interview definitely qualifies as important and relevant information about the center.

Thanks for the help. Bobcat hokie 19:57, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Spire external link

I added a link to a website that has over 100 pictures of the building's site, renders, people, previous versions. This is the most extensibale collection of pictures there is on the internet having to do with the Chicago Spire. Also, it has links to just about every newspaper article ever written. These article are searchable. This also make this website one of a kind.

It's the loss of the community by not allowing this link. I'm sure people would enjoy it and it would further the spread of information. Your loss. It can get enough exposure elee where, but is still a diservice to what wikipedia is about. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.152.21.253 (talk) 13:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Robin Cook

Hi, thank you for your support re Robin Cook. Unfortunately the material which I deleted has been put back by another IP. It may be a case of sockpuppeting but I don't have the means to prove this, and this time I can't delete it without breaching 3RR myself. Plase take any action that you consider to be appropriate. Viewfinder 11:24, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

deepspace

Hi Jeremy

I've been putting links to my site from some of the astronomy or ambient sites.

I have since then found out that i'm not allowed to do this. I understand that you don't want spam, and I wholeheartedly accept this. However, the site that I am linking to is simply a stream of space/ambient music. It is completely free, and I have no advertising on them whatsoever. I'm simply providing an opportunity for stargazers to stream ambient music while they surf. It's simply a hobby of mine, and whatsmore, it inspires me to write more music. I'm certainly not selling anything. Have a look at the site if you like, and let me know. The reason the links turned up on another IP was because i asked my brother to put the links up for me, as they kept getting deleted on my end.

http://www.deepspacehome.com

Sincerely,

Mirko

(inserted later) Am I meant to wait for a reply? I'm not sure what the procedure is. my email is: mirkoruckels@iprimus.com.au

CHICOTW

	Chicago Collaboration of the Week
Last week you helped edit the Chicago COTW, but did not vote. Thank you for your help! Your input in future selections would also be appreciated. This week Magnificent Mile has been chosen. Please help improve it towards the quality level of a Wikipedia featured article. See the To Do List to suggest a change or to see an open tasks list. See past CHICOTWs. Note our good articles.
	Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago

TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 00:50, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Landmark Stubification

I am writing you because you either (1) edited Chicago Landmark 5 weeks ago when it was the WP:CHICOTW (2) edited it or created a stub last week when we had the stubification drive for it or (3) you nominated an article to be the CHICOTW in the last few days.

I have finally had a chance to take a tally on last week’s stubification effort. Based on my manual count we now have 109 bluelinks on a total of 241 landmarks. Preliminary indications were that for our article to be successful at WP:FLC we would need to eventually rename it (something like List of Chicago Landmarks) and get the majority of the landmarks linked. Based on my cursory count we need to write 12 more articles to get to a majority. It would be great if you might be able to assist by creating a couple stubs to assist in this effort. Here are some of the stubs that were created during last week’s efforts: Black Metropolis-Bronzeville District, Historic Michigan Boulevard District, Arthur H. Compton House & One North LaSalle. Among the articles still redlinked are 2 buildings on this week’s CHICOTW, Magnificent Mile (Perkins, Fellows & Hamilton Office and Studio, Woman's Athletic Club). Recall that each redlink on Chicago Landmark has a footnote to a reference that gives you enough info to create a stub. If you create a new stub please add it to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Chicago#Newly_Created_Chicago_Related_Pages so that we can keep track of the progress. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 15:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spring Heeled Jack

Spring Heeled Jack 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. Resurgent insurgent 01:10, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]