User talk:Mike65535

Welcome!

Hello, Mike65535, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 12:55, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Shawn Colvin Just curious, where did you hear she was single, because according to her Imdb page she's still married. No granted Imdb is off about a lot of things, I'm just curious where your info came from. kc12286 17:19, 24 July 2006 (UTC)kc12286[reply]

Mt Gulaga: Please cite your sources and sign your posts

You raised the possibility that Mount Gulaga might be several hundred kilometres south. The article is actually referenced with a NSW location[1]. If there is another Mountain by that name in Tasmania, it is not listed in the Australian gazetteer at www.ga.gov.au Could you please provide a source for what you have read?

Also please, when you add content to talk pages, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also push the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --A Y Arktos\^talk 10:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Well, it seems you figured out who I was anyway - perhaps wiki should think about making signatures automatic?

I answered this question on the Mount Gulaga page: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Mount_Gulaga

--Mike 14:37, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As per the response at Mt Gulaga: Firstly, you didn't make it clear in your intital post that you were talking about Mt Dromedary, not Mt Gulaga - bit confusing, another good argument for citing your sources straight up, it would have been then obvious what you were talking about. Happy to note that there is a Mt Dromedary in Tasmania. Is it notable, does it have a wikipedia article? Will it get one soon? As per the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages), we only disambigate redlinks when we are confident that an encyclopedia article could be written on the subject. ... Adding links to articles not yet written should be done with care. There is no need to brainstorm all occurrences of the page title and create redlinks to articles that are unlikely ever to be written, or likely to be removed as insufficiently notable topics.. For the moment I will put a redirect tag onto the top of this one. Mt Dromedary in NSW named by Cook is relatively more notable in my opinion than the Tasmanian one but perhaps that is my limited geographical perspective. Happy to discuss further when, and if, the Tasmanian article is written. I have created a disambiguation page at Mount Dromedary (disambiguation) and a top link redirect on the Mt Gulaga article to redirect to that dab page. There are of course more Mt Dromedary's than those in Australia but to date there appears no conflict with the one at Tilba Tilba. However, the dab link should save on the confusion you reported.

On the subject of signatures, the reason that they are not automatic I presume is they are not of course used in articles. All postings are available in the history but signatures on talk pages make discussion easier by helping other users to identify the author of a particular comment, to navigate talk pages, and to address specific comments to the relevant user(s), among other things. It may be that an editor is making a minor adjustment to a talk page post and wouldn't want a signature stamped all over it - hence also no automatic stamping on the talk page. I used the history to figure out that it was you who had made the contribution and added an unsigned tag - took me time and is a boring chore. I note you signed your later post - thank you. Signing on talk pages is a strongly recommended guideline discussed at Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages.--A Y Arktos\^talk 21:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages

Hi

You wrote: Also, so far it has not been clear to me as to what screen/method to use to start/continue/reply to a conversation. Do I try to write on your page, or edit mine, or? Part of the confusion lies in the fact that wiki seemingly uses basically the same interface/software to generate articles as it uses for talk, etc. Cute, but not always clear, and in the case of talks/discussions/whatever, as you point out, there can be no way to have automatic signing. I've never used any kind of chat/forum whereby the author of the comment was not immediately identifiable. Maybe Wiki should think about this. Maybe something's in the FAQ, but so far I've missed it.

There are no rules as to whether I try to write on your page, or edit mine, or? but if you plan on replying on your own page, you would normally say so in the talk page header - see for example User talk:Essjay.

Conversations about the article belong on the article talk page usually. User talk pages are used to communicate with other users or leave them messages. As the conversation is pretty immediate, the thread is apparent to the users involved and an outsider may need to look at both pages to follow the thread but it wasn't meant for them to read particularly, except that the wikipedia is public and one is accountable through the publicly available talk pages. See Help:Talk page for more and for further links.

The author of any comment is identifiable, if not immediately, through the history. Wikiquette strongly suggests signatures as that helps follow who said what and when. Page history identifies all contributions regardless of space and can be done by contributer as well as by page and not just edits but actions too. For example {{user|AYArktos}} gives AYArktos (talk · contribs); {{admin|AYArktos}} gives AYArktos (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA); and {{vandal|AYArktos}} gives AYArktos (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) so it doesn't take much to find what anybody has done. For articles, there is also a template which gives easy links - ie {{article|Mount Gulaga}} gives Mount Gulaga (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and the history can be easily seen. There are of course tabs for history at the top of every page. So although not immediately identifiable, any editors contributions are definitely identifiable in multiple different permutations.

Sorry to take a while to get back to you. Hope this helps. Regards--A Y Arktos\^talk 01:26, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:ForEarthBelow trower.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:ForEarthBelow trower.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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 non-free media 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 15:22, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:ForEarthBelow trower1.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:ForEarthBelow trower.jpg. The copy called Image:ForEarthBelow trower.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot (talk) 15:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ForEarthBelow trower1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:ForEarthBelow trower1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Mike65535. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mike65535. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Mike65535. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]