User talk:TheGrappler/Archive3

Thanks for the thanks on NVE

Thanks for the thanks on NVE. It's always nice to know someone notices.

And thank you for preparing the NVE article. If I hadn't found it and thought it worthwhile, I'd not have added to it. So your contribution made a difference. Takk - Williamborg 00:43, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Swimming article

Yeah, it's a fair enough complaint. I was a bit surprised at how much comment and mail I got after becoming an admin, as well as help requests, that I haven't been able to touch it yet. Yes, there is a lot of rubbish on WP. If I knew how to analyze music groups, I would have caused an uproar for doing probably 50000+ AfDs by now! Regards, Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 01:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Wikipedia:Trust network

The Wikipedia:Trust network is now all set up and ready to go :-) Please feel free to follow the instructions and show which other contributors you have trust in! TheGrappler 21:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice. I added a few people whose edits I have bumped into to my trust network. Thue | talk 22:00, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed policy template use

I've disabled the proposed policy template you had here:User:TheGrappler/Good3 The proposed policy template is not for use in userspace as it causes personal pages to show up in Category:Wikipedia proposals. FeloniousMonk 22:28, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: RfA alert bot

Hi TheGrappler, sorry for the late reply. I'd be happy to start work on an RfA alert/opt-in spam bot using my RfA Analysis library as a base. Of course, this will be subject to scrutiny at WP:BRFA, but I hope there will be no problems with it. Cheers, Tangot a ngo 09:58, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CrazyRussian's RfA

File:Motherussia.jpg

Hello TheGrappler, and thank you for your support at my request for adminship, which ended with an awe-inspiring 86/1/2 result. I plan to do much with my shiny new tools - but I'll start slow and learn the ropes at first. Please deluge me with assignments and requests - I enjoy helping out. For Mother Russia!! - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 05:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Number of international football matches

Hi there. I was reading the comments at Template_talk:In_the_news#This_is_Wikipedia., and I noticed that you said the following: "We should not expect big changes in national football team pages - remember that they have often played thousands of international matches, it would be recentism to completely change them based on one game!" This inspired me to go and find out how many international games England have played, on the presumption that they have played the most games. It seems that they have played 838 international fixtures since 1872, so "thousands" may be overstating it slightly. On the other hand, maybe another team has played more games? Is this in Wikipedia anywhere? Carcharoth 12:16, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't really know the answer to these questions, but thanks for responding. I'm backing off the ITN thing as well now. I was never against no ITN items on the football, just not continuous coverage. I certainly would support the occasional item appearing there. Carcharoth 21:14, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Signal Hill.jpg

Thank you for moving Image:Signal Hill.jpg to Commons and also adding the full panorama image (Image:Signal Hill California Panorama.jpg) that it was taken from to the Wikimedia Commons. During the time that you did that I was snowed under with real life problems, so you made it so that there was one less problem for me to worry about.

BTW: I like both your User:TheGrappler/United States directory and User:TheGrappler/North America directory and think that they are both close to being ready to be moved in to the Wikipedia namespace. For the first page, you might think about transcluding or linking to this page: Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. states/List of state WikiProjects (Unfortunately there is not a list of just the US cities that have WikiProjects, but here is a list of all the cities that have WikiProjects: Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/List of city WikiProjects). ^Blank ^Verse 10:08, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm now looking to buy a digital camera. One of the first things that I want to do is a modern recreation of the Signal Hill photo for the Wikipedia to show what Signal Hill is like today. I think that the photo was taken fairly near where I live, but from the top of an oil derrick. I don't think that I could get permission to photograph from one of the portable derricks they use these days when they are doing new drilling, but there are a number of modern warehouses hearby and I might be able to get permission to do the photograph from the roof of one of them.

The Library of Congress website has a special section spotlighting the panoramic photos in their collection. Panoramic photos were apparently quite popular around the turn of the last century. Most of them, unfortunately, would be hard to use on the Wikipedia without cropping them, like I did with the Signal Hill image. One of them that I'm thinking of using is of a huge bathing beauty contest that was in Santa Monica, California.

The best thing about the lists that I gave you is that you can Wikipedia:transclusion|transclude]] them to keep them current. I was the person who created both the California WikiProject and the Southern California WikiProject. I tried to keep the lists of similar Wikiprojects current on both pages, but it was a real PITA. Then someone created the list of the state Wikiprojects and transcluded it to the CALIF Wikiproject page. I found it so handy that I created the subpage with the list of city Wikiprojects (which reminds me, I haven't had the time to transclude the page to all of the city Wikiproject pages, but its now added it to my ToDo list at least). ^Blank ^Verse 06:50, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Amykocot report on WP:RFI

Looks like you did the right thing by nominating the articles for deletion and warning the user for spam, but as you mention there isn't much point in blocking at this moment as edits have stopped for now. I'll leave it on RFI for a bit to keep watch, feel free to re-report once I've archived if this user returns. Cheers, Petros471 17:41, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've now added Amykocot to the vandalism IRC channel blacklist. How much attention that gets from RC patrollers depends on the time of day. Petros471 18:02, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This user is still spamming. I've reverted edits yesterday and today. The user is up to spam4 now for warnings. Yankees76 22:10, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This user is obviously an employee of Geary Interactive and or Speak Inc. IMHO the sooner we remove these vanity articles the better. In the meantime, I'll enjoy removing links etc. Yankees76 22:24, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trust

[copied]

Thank you for your contribution at WP:TRUST. Given how well-used the system is at de: I was a little surprised so few people believed that it could be useful to them. You seem to have something of a trust list on your user page any way, perhaps you should put an equivalent list at User:Jmabel/Trust? Whether it's part of the "web of trust" or not, I've always found people's "these are some users who I really respect/admire/want to thank" lists fascinating reading, if only because they serve as a great reminder that there are loads of good editors out there, often doing great work on topics that I don't look at so often. Having said that, looking at the spread of your contributions, I suspect that there are few areas of Wikipedia you've never at least ventured into! TheGrappler 22:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[end copied]

I threw something together. Best of luck with this. - Jmabel | Talk 23:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of cemeteries in Ocean County, New Jersey

Just a cursory look around the Wikiworld shows a slew of far more meaningless lists. I still can't understand why there was any legitimate reason to delete these lists, other than folks who seem to favor deleting any article they are uninterested in or unfamiliar with a particular topic. Other than that, WP:NJ is making graet strides and we will end up recreating these articles sooner rather than later. Thanks for the kind words and all your efforts on Wikipedia. Alansohn 02:22, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rugby union in Fiji

Hi Grappler, thanks a lot for leaving me a mesage. I'm guessing you saw it on the DYK section on the front page? But yeah, some of those Rugby union in X articles are looking quite good (Rugby union in New Zealand is another good one). Thanks for message. Cheers. Cvene64 03:45, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see the Fiji one at GA noms now, thanks for organising that Grappler. Cheers. Cvene64 14:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA disputes and vetos

Hi,

We are having a discussion about a change to the delisting procedure here. Since you were part of the group that formulated the dispute procedure your feedback on the matter would be appreciated if you have the time.

Best wishes,

Cedars 03:05, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Velociraptor

I added to the fair use rationale for the Jurassic Park picture in the Velociraptor article just now, please check and see if you find it adequate. As it is now a featured article, we should be even more sure everything is on the up-and-up. Thanks! Sheep81 21:06, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! For the compliments as well as your help. The article really was a true collaborative effort. Feel free to drop by WikiProject Dinosaurs sometime if you are interested in discussing things or helping out. In just about six months I believe we have improved Wikipedia's dinosaur coverage exponentially. We are on a roll... three dinosaurs featured in one month! Sheep81 21:32, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whites in Zimbabwe

Grappler. Thanks for your latest comments. Your points about the images are accepted. The Fair Use status of some of them is borderline. Obviously, I have many copyright free photographs of white Zimbabweans, but not of high-profile white Zimbabweans. People are interested in Chelsy Davy and John Bredenkamp - and not in 'Joe Snooks'. Leave it with me for a couple of weeks and I will see what I can do. Bob BScar23625 16:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grappler. Would you be kind enough to take a look at Image:ZBWE1.jpg and let me know what you think about its copyright/Fair Use status?. I am considering inserting it as the lead image. The copyrightholder is a well known photojournalist and I would give her a credit. Bob BScar23625 22:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grappler. Thanks for the comments. I will do as you suggest. Bob BScar23625 05:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grappler. I have had an exchange with the librarian of the MEM collection, which ended as follows :

QUOTE

Hi Bob, Unfortunately, I cannot grant permission for use of this photo as specified. Even though it seems that there is a link to the text of the original article, I feel that the image may be misrepresentative of the topic and do not feel comfortable granting permission. I hope you understand my concerns. Best, Meredith

Meredith Lue, Falkland Road Inc., Mary Ellen Mark Library/Studio, 37 Greene Street, 4th floor, New York, NY 10013, tel: 212-925-2770

UNQUOTE

Make of that what you will. This particular image is a work of art and so I would take care with its use. Bob BScar23625 18:59, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Special figures image

Thanks for the reminder on the source. Vesperholly 19:09, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LOL...that's cool. Constant vigilance! Vesperholly 19:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Free use image sources

Here are some that I have come across with my involvement in WikiProject NASCAR. Much of this was written by the extremely helpful User:Nv8200p. He's an awesome resource for image stuff. He was the deletor on some of our images, so I asked him to set us straight. I have cut and paste, so you may need to do some research to find a link that is more appropriate for general use:

Florida Photographic Collection at [1]. They use the tag: {{Flphoto}}. Change the pulldown to Florida Photographic Collection. While the images are taken in Florida only, there are many that apply to a broad number of non-place specific articles. I have found quite a few images of earlier than 1965 drivers and cars racing at Daytona International Speedway, plus MOST images of land speed record holders and attemptors at the Daytona Beach Road Course. It was a huge find for the WikiProject, and historic and vintage racing in general.

Public domain websites such as most of the military websites (Examples: U.S. Army Racing,U.S. Marines, U.S. Navy, U.S. Coast Guard, and U.S. Air Force). Read the Privacy and Security page to verify the site is public domain (and provide a link to it) and provide the proper summary and image copyright tag on the image description page (See Image:Vehicle simulator.jpg for example). To find these image, enter <subject> .mil or <subject> .gov (example: NASCAR .mil) in a search engine.

Images from photo hosting sites such as flickr can be used if the copyright holder grants a free license like those mentioned in item 1 on the webpage the image is taken from. A link to the webpage must be provided on the image description page. If the image says "All Rights Reserved," the image is not acceptable on Wikipedia, probably not even as fair use. So what it boils down to is you can use anything found here - Creative Commons Attribution and here - Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike ONLY.

I'll let you add this information to the new template that you added to the requests for photos by state categories.

I'll notice that I have added around a dozen images of places that I have visited in Wisconsin in recent months. Even though I disagreed with your methods, your comments have not fallen on deaf ears.

I bet these links will keep you out of trouble for a while. HAVE FUN! --Royalbroil 02:08, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cinco Ranch High School

I agree this should be on hold, but you forgot to tag it on the nom page, so I did. You mainly addressed the images, whereas to me it smacks of POV and braggadocio. Rlevse 19:20, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a bunch of progress on the article

Found evidence and rewrote best high school in america section
reordered pictures
changed the citations for the better
Discipline and student culture section and some parts of the intro are really the only parts needing work. With a little advice it should easily be a good article.

check it out and tell me what you think. Andman8 02:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grappler-I'm not sure if this article is OK now or not. What do you think? Rlevse 22:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ive come up with the perfect solution, a final solution if you will, for the Cinco article. I swung the axe and moved all controversies to a different page just like there's a walmart article and a walmart controversies article. While the remaining Cinco page probably still isn't GA worthy it's significantly closer. Take a look and tell me what you think. Andman8 00:05, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Noida-Sec-School-Stub

Why have you proposed that this stub temoplate be deleted? There are more than 25 secondary scools in Noida and articles on two schools are alrweady on the works on wikipedia. This stub templates forms a part of the wikiproject WP:NOIDASCHOOLS that I have started.

Unitedroad 13:58, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok but there are enough such schools in Noida. Maybe we can expand the scope to District Gautam Budh Nagar. Then we will have about 60 schools to suffice the stub template if people get involved and get articles on most of them started. Are you from around this place? If yes then you can help me with it.Alteast you can help me find more editors from Noida?

Unitedroad 14:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can I save the template at a subpage on my userpage? I am not using it until I get enough people involved and we get the required number of articles. I guess I will change the project to District Budh Nagar from Noida. But I surely could do with some support from you. I won';t ask for any unreasonable favour but sometimes admins get pernickity and this is where I will be be obliged if you let help this project get some room to grow.

Unitedroad 14:12, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bro I am sorry I sounded a little weird in my first message but then I had not read your first message to me. I now know how things stand and what needs to be done but I would be glad if you answer my last question.

Unitedroad 14:20, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have posted on Indian wikipedia's notice boards a few times before but never about this project. I will give it a try now.

Unitedroad 14:21, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Portal links

I appreciate the note and the information rather than reverts. I was not aware of a guideline on location of the links; and was following what I'd seen in some other articles with portal links (not just USMC articles). I'd appreciate it if you would not make any changes to the location of USMC Portal links (for now). I'd like an opportunity to check with the Portal coordinator whether or not it is an issue that we'd like to make a case for a change.

For new articles, I'll abide by the curent guidelines. Thanks for the information. — ERcheck (talk) 15:11, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you direct me to the discussion that developed the current guidelines as referred to in the link you provided? Thanks. — ERcheck (talk) 18:22, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Persondata name

That is an excellent question, but I stand by my decision. I think the "George Walker Bush" was used because it is a direct example that most people can readily recognize, but I still believe that the basic name should mirror theone the article is located at. The guidelines apply obviously both to basic names and alternative, and state nothing as to the choice of which name shuld be used as the basic one. Circeus 21:25, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, I interpretated it exactly the other way: That if both middle name and forename are part of the default, then this is how it should be used. In the end, the page makes no statement one way or the other whatsoever, and for the sake of consistency, I still maintain my use of the article title there. Circeus 21:42, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the "name" discussion of the talk page, someone is advised to go my way. I do agree that this should be specified on thepage, though. I have added the page to my watchlist in the meantime. Circeus 21:49, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BookCovers

Hi - thanks for your comments on book covers. I think/understand that the fair use permission is usually OK if there's a review element and I think the article Pedophilia and child sexual abuse in fiction should qualify. I did have much more 'review' content, but this was voted out as original research (I don't think it was, but the majority rules!)

best wishes Tony Sandel 9 July

Union Station (San Diego)

Wow. I'm extremely impressed. If you could get out the cite.php and thumb through your references for some inline citations, there's little doubt in my mind that this has real featured article potential. There's lots of sources, lots of pictures (old and new), image licensing is great (it's nice not to have to fall back on "fair use"), and there was obviously plenty to write about. I reckon you ought to have a go at getting this ready for WP:FAC, having put all the effort into it. TheGrappler 17:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words. I'm in the process of reviewing my notes and will add inline refs to the article int he next little bit.--Lordkinbote 18:55, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2007 Cricket World Cup Qualification

Yeah that'd be great if you could put one up - it took me quite a while to figure out how it all worked myself. And as for the task force, well, I think that'd be a great idea. --mdmanser 23:08, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Baden-Powell House now?

Hi TheGrappler, would you be so kind as to have another look at the Baden-Powell House article? Two weeks ago I proposed it for FA, and you were one to contribute significantly with highly appreciated feedback on further improvements. By additional research and significant editing, a lot has been done. Are there issues that would prevent it from having a successful FAC nomination now? Wim van Dorst (Talk) 20:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I of course acknowledge that you are working very actively on numerous items. As you suggested to provide some further useful feedback, I hope you won't take it amiss that I gently remind you by editing this section. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 19:22, 13 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]
- Thanks highly for the wellfounded feedback. It has all been taken care of. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 00:25, 15 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]
- The article is now up for FA again here. Would you please be so kind as to cast a vote, preferablye supporting of course? Wim van Dorst (Talk) 23:02, 18 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for bringing it up

Thanks for that info. Its unfortunate that we cannot use it and AP and TimeLife usually have great pictures that are difficult to obtain copyright use. I suppose if the case is really that weak, then deletion of the image will be the best course of action.--MarshallBagramyan 01:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

tango

your referencing and rearranging ... great work. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 14:12, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

fixed: http://eng.tango.info/singers , clicking on a letter brings singers. Some singer pages will show number of tracks. http://eng.tango.info/PedroArrie brings 35 tracks. Some original recordings may be published several times, yielding more tracks. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:07, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am owner of tango.info. 10 days ago I changed the database layout and forget an entry in one php-script, so the singers were not shown anymore. When I first read the page is not workig, I thought you didn't understand that you have to press a letter.... fortunatly I found that it really did not work. Thanks for your bug report. :-) BTW, tango.info will get deleted soon. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 20:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neil Forrester

I am sure that your complete wipe-out of the content at Neil Forrester and redirect to another page was well-intentioned, but it was unequivocably unacceptable. You can't just go in and wipe out someone's researched edit because you have arbitrarily decided that an article doesn't deserve to exist. I am restoring the article, and if you have contention with this, I suggest you put it up as a nomination for deletion so you can let the wikipedia community decide. Pacian 01:32, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Though I am sure that your complete removal of the content at Neil Forrester (and other than the edit history - and regardless of your thought process behind it - it was a complete removal) was in good faith, but the reasoning you continue to provide just seems, at best, factually incorrect. More than 50% of the content that is within the Neil Forrester article does NOT appear in the [{Real World: London]] article. So if your main point of contention is that the article is mostly duplicate information, you are simply incorrect. With the advent of reality television comes a plethora of people who are brought into the global eye with their main notable act being nothin more than having appeared on reality television. As such it seems to be the wiki-standard to give those people an article, discusss their TV work, and then flesh it out with as much applicable biographical information as possible. That is what I did. Please see Maggie Ausburn; Drew Daniel. Pacian 16:40, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your article, John Howarth, was selected for DYK!

On July 13, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John Howarth, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! ++Lar: t/c 02:01, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lubbock High School

I've read most of the stuff about wiki guidelines and I believe lubbock high school deserves to be delisted.

All of the references come from the internet
many sections are incomplete stubs
the writing is choppy and generally poor

If you think lubbock is still a good article please reconsider cinco. Cinco has more information and even though you believe the references suck I clicked through all of them and they all back up the info in the article. I also read through cinco entirely one final time completely and cross referenced it with plano and thought they were generally comparable. Andman8 02:45, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neil Forrester pic in RW London article

Thanks very much for adding the pic. I take it you're a fan of Neil Forrester, rather than an obscure 11yr old reality show?!

(Reply to your message posted on my discussion page.)

--Labcoat 23:23, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

--Labcoat 11:44, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for investigation processed

Hello TheGrappler. Please note that your recent request for investigation concerning Amykocot has been processed. The administrator's response was: "Archived; user is watchlisted and seems to have stopped". This is a form notification, and this page has not been watchlisted; if you'd like to comment, please do so on my talk page. Thank you. // [admin] Pathoschild (^talk/_map) 20:13, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the AfD support

Thanks for your comment in AfD Overweight people. It's easy to think one is becoming paranoid with in the AfD discussions. Glad to see there were a few more reasons I missed :) -- MrDolomite | Talk 01:15, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IG Farben Building FAC

Thanks for your comments on the FAC. I've re-referenced the majority of the article. Perhaps you might take another look?--Mcginnly 08:02, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I posted the IG Farben Building on the FAC on the 17th July. It currently has a support consensus, but only from 4 people. I'd be more comfortable with a stronger consensus and was wondering if you might be prepared to comment further on the article? Many thanks. --Mcginnly | Chinwag 11:37, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Many thanks for your further comments, I've amended as you suggested. Do feel able to Support the article now? --Mcginnly | Natter 03:36, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Macedonia (terminology)

Thank you for your comment. Large scale modifications have taken place since you made it. For more details, please refer to the link above, and to the article itself. :NikoSilver: 12:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A question:

Macedonians (as an ethnic group) refers to the majority of the population of the Republic of Macedonia.^{[citation needed]}

Are you disputing this? If you see the article Macedonians (ethnic group),

The Macedonians (Македонци, Makedonci) - also referred to as Macedonian Slavs [1] - are a South Slavic ethnic group who live in the southern Balkans region of Europe. They speak the Macedonian language, a South Slavic language, and most of them are part of the Macedonian Orthodox Church. The majority of Macedonians today inhabit parts of the geographical region of Macedonia along with other ethnic groups, mainly Greeks (who are also known as Macedonians in this region), Albanians and Bulgarians, the largest single population of Macedonians inhabiting the Republic of Macedonia.

I mean, I could cite it from the Oxford English Dictionary, but it hardly seems necessary. - FrancisTyers · 13:15, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the "Names in the languages of the region" tags, again, if you look at the interwiki tags, it is quite clear for the majority of these. I've removed the tags for now, if you really think that it needs sourcing that the Macedonians call Macedonia Македонија, which is transliterated as Makedonija etc. then by all means re-add the tag[s]. - FrancisTyers · 13:27, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Full citation for everything and a lot more prose has been added. Kindly re-evaluate. :NikoSilver: 13:19, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Second Update: All your comments have been worked on or responded. :NikoSilver: 13:17, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Third Update: You've given us a hard time with all your comments, but it was worth it. The article has definitely improved significantly. We've (once again) dealt with all your comments. Kindly re-evaluate. Thanks. :NikoSilver: 16:02, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grappler, I am really tired with this and declare incompetence. Feel free to suggest or even edit the article. I don't WP:OWN it, you know. I'm really tired of new gliches popping up all the time. Yet, again, I've made one more correction per your advice. Please do the rest, or suggest someone who can. I'm out. :NikoSilver: 23:21, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and thanks. Before I go into detail, kindly check if you have a hidden section or smthng in your talk: I had to click "edit" in the above section (IG Farben Building FAC) to get into this one, coz clicking this one, would direct me to a blank edit window!?! This is the third time. I'll be back about the topic shortly...:NikoSilver: 10:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your question about Ottoman empire not having it in maps, is sourced by ref#4. The book in google is for restricted access, but index and contents are readable. I think it is evident that the book may state so, but don't have access myself. Can't dispute the source provided by some other user in the region article though...

Your question about 4.76M people, I think it is the sum of the censa given by all respective sources (i.e. Greek, Macedonian Slavic and Bulgarian). In view of it being kinda WP:OR (coz the censa may be of different dates and the sum seems too 'exact'), I would suggest we rephrase it from "and a population of 4.76 million" to "and has a total population of c.4.5 to 5 million." I'll try and add the sources to the censa too. Ok? :NikoSilver: 13:00, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After I added the numbers up, I came up with c.5M. See article. I think we're done! Thanks for your notes! :NikoSilver: 14:11, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll address his concerns right now. The numbers for c.5M are sourced right below analytically. I think that under WP:NOR, we're allowed to do 2.6M + 2.0M + 0.35M = ~5M right, so we don't need another source. When does the FAC close? :NikoSilver: 22:43, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

{{cfd2}} etc

Unfortunately William will probably revert. --SPUI (T - C) 19:53, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#William Allen Simpson trying to make CFR a vote --SPUI (T - C) 01:27, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tyrannosaurus

Your objection has been fixed, as the problem picture has been removed as per a previous plan if it caused objections. I sincerly hope you would be able to support the article now that your problem has been remidied. Thanks a bunch! Spawn Man 23:16, 23 July 2006 (UTC). [reply]

Left comment on the above page. However, may I ask if your withdrawl of objection is to support the article or to remain neutral? A supporting vote would go a looong way! Thanks, Spawn Man 23:37, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sue's brain

This image is my picture of the display of the CT reconstruction at the Field Museum on the second floor next to Sue's skull, which was crushed by the aeons of time. The skull on the first floor of the museum is a lighter replica, unsmashed. --Ancheta Wis 03:08, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

As I understand it, my image can be my copyright. The display at the Field Museum is owned by the museum. But I am allowed to take a picture of a picture; the museum is filled with photographers and artists at any given moment, as proof of this policy. --Ancheta Wis 03:15, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly, the CT reconstruction was created by Boeing in behalf of the Museum. The notation was likely added by the staff of the Museum to aid the viewers. The rendering is clearly the Museum's. My picture of the rendering is mine, just as the fossil has been assigned to the Museum, but my pictures of the fossil are mine. --Ancheta Wis 03:29, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I obviously did not make a copy of the display, which covers a wall, but selected a detail. --Ancheta Wis 03:31, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Image:IndPilots01.jpg

Thanks a lot for your detailed message. I have changed the license to PD-India. However, I really could not find out any data to verify the exact date of publication of the photo. I am trying to find out. Thanks a lot.--Dwaipayan (talk) 05:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Labatt Park good article nomination

There's scores of visuals available that would be suitable for the Labatt Park page(s). I have dozens in my personal possession, plus there's plenty in the public domain (Archives of Canada, for example) that are suitable. I, however, don't know how to upload these visuals onto the Labatt Park page(s) on Wikipedia. Yes, I've read the "instructions," but it's all Greek to me, unfortunately. I have the same problem with women's bras. Barry Wells 22:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There some good visuals (first two visuals) here that are in the public domain (Archives Canada) that would fit nicely in the section on the Labatt Park page about Bryce's baseball guides for 1876 and 1877. The story about these two rare booklets is here Many thanks for your able assistance. Barry Wells 21:01, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for retrieving those public domain images. But I still don't know how to drop them into the Labatt Park article. I've got three briefcases of recent and old photos of the stadium/ ballpark but I don't have a scanner (they're hard copy visuals -- although I might have a few on a CD). I'll have to take them to someone else's place and get the article spruced up. Thanks again. Barry Wells 00:19, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a photo here that I took of longtime London Major and London Sports Hall of Fame inductee Norm Aldridge at Labatt Park in 1998 that could go on the Labatt Park page or the London Majors page. I loaned it to the city to use on the City of London Web site earlier this year. Barry Wells 00:26, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, GFDL (the license used for Wikipedia) sounds fine. And thanks again for your kind help. I know how to transfer images once they are on WP, so I don't know what I was thinking of, saying I didn't. I've got a few images on my user page. Must be the heat! Barry Wells 16:41, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again. But where is the "Commons page"? I'm currently on the computer of a friend and can't remember my password. Barry Wells

Norm Aldridge, the Viking Warrior

Really appreciate your help with this image. I confirmed your licensing info on the talk page on the Wiki-Commons. The City put that photo on its Web page (after I gave it to them) to commemorate Norm's 82nd birthday. He loves that photo. He's quite a character who's also had a baseball diamond named after him in northeast London -- Norm Aldridge Field.

Labatt Park GA nomination

Although I've provided much of the info for the Labatt Park article, it wasn't me who nominated it for GA status. Is there a way to find who did? Barry Wells 00:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Svalbard

You're doing quite excellent work on the Svalbard article. I'll sort through your post later tonight and see what I can contribute. Be patient—the weather is grand—the mountains are green—summer holiday starts later this week—and the "to do list" is long. But I'll get back to Svalbard. Skål Williamborg (Bill) 12:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Finally back. Had a strange diversion on the way—someone suggested I might want to stand for admin—did so with some reservation—got rejected for ignorance of what admins do & failure to show interest in admin things—spent the rest of the summer trying to figure out what admins do and why—but now that I have some idea, perhaps it is time to get back to editing. Although I fear I'll wander off and "waste" time thinking about what admins do some more.

Think I got the area for Svalbard at long last. EB agrees with the Norwegian site. So I made that change... Skål Williamborg (Bill) 04:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More on Svalbard

Was able to spend some time digging today.

YOUR INDICATED: I'm working on obtaining a better quality map to use to check/expand the labelling of the maps I have produced. In the meanwhile, if you see that I have made any glaring errors, I can correct them if you point them out to me!

Your maps look pretty good to me. Any map can be checked against that on ref the web publication of Statistics Norway; which I’d take as a reasonable official body for such data in Norway.

1. YOU INDICATED: I suspect that we are underreporting the area in square km of Spitsbergen by about 30%, probably because somebody hasn't converted square miles and square km accurately, but I can't find definitive figures to replace these obvious errors with. If you could check that out I'd appreciate it!

Pulled the data from reference the web publication of Statistics Norway, and added it to the article. Seemed to me to be the best source, even though I've also pulled Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica. 1986. ISBN none. & Mark Nuttal, editor (2005). Encyclopedia of the Artic. Routledge. ISBN. {{cite book}}: |author= has generic name (help).

2. YOU INDICATED: On a similar theme I am having a real problem with factual sourcing, which is obviously taken less seriously on no: and other language Wikipedias. The NPI Svalbard Names Database gives areas for some islands but not others. The figures for area used on other language Wikipedias are different to those stated in Britannica, but I can't find where they are getting them from. I found a hint that Statistics Norway may be the primary source (another website quoted identical figures for some of the areas and cited them) but can't find a particular webpage. The facts I am really having difficulty sourcing are:

YOU INDICATED: Island areas and coastlines

Pulled the data from Statistics Norway and added it to the article. Seemed to me to be the best source.

YOU INDICATED: What area of islands is covered by glaciers (can't find this anywhere! Not sure if Statistics Norway is the source for this information or not)

The calculations were based on the data from Statistics Norway, and added it to the article. I got a glacial coverage figure of 59.8% when I used the Statistics Norway numbers; that’s a virtual match (considering rounding) with 60%.

YOU INDICATED: Lengths of fjords (the NPI Names Database does contain some figures, but not all... is this something done by Statistics Norway? Or maybe even NVE?)

The longest five fjords are covered by Statistics Norway; I added them to the article.

YOU INDICATED: There is also clearly some inconsistency about using the -en and -et endings on place-names. I have generally stuck with what I see on maps (which generally lack the definite endings), while the NVE seems to like putting these endings on. Is there a naming convention for this situation?

AS you know, something of a classic problem with Norwegian. My father used to joke about an uncle who was quite the linguist—he spoke 8 languages—and 7 of them were Norwegian. You might default to the names used in Statistics Norway.

Keep up the outstanding work. Skål - Williamborg (Bill) 01:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Map help?

Hey, I've come across a set of articles that could use your map making talents, so I thought I'd take you up on your offer from a little while ago. I'm working on several Peloponnesian War battles (the Battle of Cynossema is an example) in the Hellespont, and it would be great to get a good map of the area. Something sized like Image:Troas.png would be about right (I would use that one, but the contour lines are just weird). The critical points to include on the map would be Sestos, Abydos, Elaeus, Dardanus from the Troas map, and Lampsacus and Rhoeteum, both of which I can pinpoint for you if you can't find the location. If you've got time to work on this, that would be great. --Robth^Talk 23:16, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the long delay!

I will be able to provide a map of the Hellespont in the near future. Sorry for the delayed reply, I have managed in the intervening time to move house twice and find a new job, while, due to the world-beating customer-driven focus of my internet company, my net connection (which I am still being billed for) has remained resolutely stuck in the first house. Add this to the bill for being left hanging on the customer "service" line and it is rather easy to see why I'm getting "net-frustrated" at the moment, hence the lengthy absence from Wiki. At least I've just discovered that I'm not addicted really! I rather like this new category viewing feature though, when did that come in? The map of the Hellespont will be forthcoming - would you be able to specify whether the locations you specified are towns/villages, mountains or some other geographical feature, and additionally whether any of them deserves prominence (e.g. is one a city and others outlying villages?). I could also upload an alternative version that includes the ancient Greek toponyms if you could provide me with the Greek names as well?

Nice to hear from you again, as ever, TheGrappler 16:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You certainly have been busy; it's good to have you back! I'm not sure what the category feature you're talking about is (shows you how well I keep up with the goings on around here) so I'm not quite sure when that started.

As to the map, all those places are cities or villages. The three major cities are Abydos, Sestos, and Lampsacus; the rest are all smaller settlements. All the names I gave are transliterations of the ancient names; I don't know what these places are called nowadays, if they still exist at all. Ancient names should be sufficient, I think. Thanks for your help, --Robth^Talk 18:37, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use images in lists

Hello, I see you have contributed your thoughts to Wikipedia talk:Fair use/Fair use images in lists. It's been dead for a while, but I have archived it and taken a new fresh start. I hope this time we will be able to achieve something as I have summarized the main points of both sides (feel free to improve them) and I call you to express your support or oppose on the concrete proposal that I have formulated. Thanks, Renata 02:25, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Burghead mast

Please see note at Talk:Burghead transmitting station re {reqphotoin|Scotland} Ben MacDui 09:44, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: Nomination fix

Oh, that's no problem. As for what you did wrong, if you want to replace PAGENAME in the default afd2 template, as shown here:

{{subst:afd2 | pg={{subst:PAGENAME}} | cat=U | text=Reasons.}}

you also have to get rid of the subst template that goes with it. Otherwise, every mention of the page name will instead be {{subst:name_of_page}} rather than just "name_of_page". {{subst:PAGENAME}} automatically gets the page name from the nomination page's name, so you don't have to input it yourself. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 18:22, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks re: PARS society AFD nom

Just a quick note to thank you for helping me out with the structure and format, I hope next time I need to do it, I can figure it out on my own! I'd give you a barnstar, but I don't know how to do that, either ;).... Huw Powell 20:23, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GAC backlog elimination drive

This form message is being sent to you either due to your membership with WikiProject Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. A new drive has been started requesting that all members review at least one article (or more, if you wish!) within the next two weeks at GAC to help in removing the large backlog. This message is being sent to all GA members and even members who have been recently reviewing articles. There are almost 130 members in this project and about 180 articles that currently need to be reviewed. If each member helps to review just one or two articles, the majority of the backlog will be cleared. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :{{GAReview}} underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the GAC talk page. --Nehrams2020 23:50, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

July 2007 GAC backlog elimination drive

A new elimination drive of the backlog at Wikipedia:Good article candidates will take place from the month of July through August 12, 2007. There are currently about 130 articles that need to be reviewed right now. If you are interested in helping with the drive, then please visit Wikipedia:Good article candidates backlog elimination drive and record the articles that you have reviewed. Awards will be given based on the number of reviews completed. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :{{GAReview}} underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the drive's talk page. Please help to eradicate the backlog to cut down on the waiting time for articles to be reviewed.

You have received this message either due to your membership with WikiProject: Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. --Nehrams2020 23:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

merging {{reqphotoin}} with {{reqphoto}}

I've extended the {{reqphoto}} template to categorize photo requests by location, with "in", "in2" and "in3" parameters. Doing so simplifies the template namespace but also permits categorizing a photograph several different ways: as different kinds of objects and different locations all at once (e.g. {{reqphoto|architecture}}) in a way that neither of the original templates could do.

The PhotoCatBot has been given approval to walk through articles using the reqphotoin template and change them to use {{reqphoto}} instead; when that's done I'll file a TfD request for {{reqphotoin}}.

I'm letting you know because you're the author of the original {{reqphotoin}} template, and I hope that you aren't offended or put out by what I've done! Your work was invaluable and clearly filled a considerable need (noting how many thousands of articles now use it :-). What I'm doing is trying to build upon what you contributed, and I hope you agree that it makes sense for the project. Thanks. Tim Pierce 23:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Afdbox

Template:Afdbox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Rocket000 07:40, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for November 2007

The November 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the December 2007 issue. Dr. Cash 01:23, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Election Controversies

Yeah, i had totally forgotten about that post. You can go ahead and nominate one for deletion. Even if that doesn't go through it will certainly get people to work on merging anything that is at all relevant. Thanks. -Bonus Onus 02:42, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Howtoreqphotoin

Thanks for adding GeoGroup to this template. Good idea. Traveler100 06:18, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is the purpose of adding {{GeoGroupTemplate}} in {{Howtoreqphotoin}}. Do you have an example where those added links produce a useful map? Is there any connection with the WP New Orleans banner (it's somehow transcluded there, I don't know why). Thanks. --Qyd 16:03, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk: Commission

No problem. Good luck finding someone with the knowledge to help. Let me know if you gather some sources and I might be able to help with the article.--Opark 77 21:26, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Dominionism

Hi Grappler. The Template:Dominionism TfD, on which you commented, has been closed with no consensus (default to keep). Although the TfD debate touched on several issues regarding the form the infobox should now take, much seems unresolved. I invite you to participate in further discussion on this topic. Thank you. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 05:26, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your input needed

As you were the one getting the discussion rolling at CfD, could you please comment at Template_talk:WikiProject_Germany#CfD_affecting_this_template - thanks -- Agathoclea 14:17, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gayness

I like the little essay on your userpage - it's mildly amusing. Maybe you should move it into the [[Category:Wikipedia essays]]; I'm sure people would enjoy reading it.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 21:56, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for December 2007

The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the January 2008 issue. Dr. Cash 01:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Volapük again...

Dear TheGrappler, as you maybe already know, there's a new proposal against the Volapük Wikipedia: m:Proposals for closing projects/Radical cleanup of Volapük Wikipedia. Would you perhaps want to help us defend the Volapük Wikipedia, in case you agree with our viewpoint? Thanks in advance! --Smeira 04:14, 27 december 2007.

WikiProject Good Articles January Newsletter

Happy New Year! Here is the latest edition of the WikiProject GA Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 04:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter

The February 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash (talk) 05:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:Lakebox depth

A tag has been placed on Template:Lakebox depth requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.