Jump to content

User talk:Trilobite/archive

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an archive page. Please leave new messages on my current talk page.


Welcome

Hello "Trilobite" and welcome to Wikipedia. A few tips for you:

Translations

You know, I put up that list of untranslated pages concerning Chile as a personal to-do list. I didn't think anyone would actually translate the pages. Thanks so much for doing that...I really appreciate it! I'm glad you're an editor here at Wiki. Samboy 15:35, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! — Trilobite 17:14, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Public domain image tagging

Hello. I noticed you changed the tag on Image:Westminster.JPG from "PD-US" to "PD". I'm 99.9+% sure you are correct in doing this. I have used the "PD-US" on some of the pre-1923 images I have scanned from original sources because I have never succeeded in getting an exact answer as to the date and circumstances need for me to assume that one of these is PD rather than simply PD-US. If you have info, or if this has more recently been dealt with somewhere on Wikipedia which I haven't noticed, I would appreciate a pointer. Best wishes, -- Infrogmation 15:56, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I am also 99.9+% sure which is why I made the change, but I wasn't aware that you thought the same but chose to keep it as "PD-US" just in case. My understanding of the copyright situation (which is fairly limited) is that a picture of that age will be public domain, and not just in the US. I don't have any new information however, so I have changed it back to be on the safe side. Thanks for pointing this out. — Trilobite 16:06, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Ack. Thanks for your reply. I'd like to have more images at PD than PD-US if possible. I guess I should try making noise about getting guidelines on this again soon. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 16:50, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

NPOV dispute on British National Party

I've put back the NPOV dispute message because none of my comments were addressed. Please understand I don't particularly like the BNP (from what I've read of them!), but I also don't like unclear articles. Perhaps you could help address the comments I mentioned in the talk page so we could remove the POV tag? - Ta bu shi da yu 01:48, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Understood. I removed the notice because there had been no edits for a couple of weeks, which led me to the conclusion that it was no longer needed. I will have a look at the article and see what I can do. — Trilobite 01:54, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Millilitres of beer

On beer, either the original or your changes could have been correct when giving the number of millilitres in a pint, depending on whether the UK or US pint was being used. I suspect the "unit of alcohol" is imprecise enough that it doesn't actually matter which is in use. Marnanel 02:30, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I am aware of the difference between UK and US pints, but the article seemed to be referring to UK pints so I reverted. As it's ambiguous I have now taken the reference out, because as you said it doesn't matter in this case. I have left 568 in on the picture caption where UK pints are definitely the intended meaning. On a related matter, is beer sold by the pint in the US? I have been but only drunk beer from bottles which as I recall were in some unrelated multiple. Beer served from a tap in Britain is always sold by the pint or half pint (as you are probably aware coming from Hitchin). Is that the case in the US? — Trilobite 02:41, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

You currently have the entry for Blackpool in your sandbox, which has the category English seaside resorts.

This means the category listing of category:English seaside resorts contains a link to your sandbox.. T0m 13:49, 2004 Aug 29 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing this out; it hadn't occurred to me to remove the category. It was only supposed to have sat in the sandbox for a few minutes anyway but I haven't got round to working on it. I will remove the category. — Trilobite 13:55, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Fair use image tagging

Regarding your concern over the copyright status of the Tesco logo I uploaded: I have added a fair use label. The rationale is that it is a low resolution image of the Tesco logo and is only being used for informational purposes. I will be happy to remove all links to the image and request its deletion myself if you feel this does not justify its use. Apologies for not providing labels in the first place. Regards Mark 22:29, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks very much, I think the consensus on corporate logos is that they are fine under fair use. My only concern was that it needed the tag. Thanks again. — Trilobite 22:33, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

ACORN

We've been discussing this daily; several folks have okayed the disambig post as it stood before your edit. See Talk:Acorn. I've reverted back.

--LegCircus 02:44, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

My apologies. It seemed like a non-standard way of doing things and I wasn't aware it had already been discussed. — Trilobite 02:47, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The ACORN page got shreaded. About two thirds of the article was deleted, and a bogus criticisms section was added. A lot of the work done was good, helpful work, but too much was deleted for no good reason. I think there should be a criticisms section, but the criticisms section has both spurious and wrong information. All changes by one user (who has made little other contributions to wiki).

Please take a look at the page and make your own judgement. I am no longer comfortable acting directly in this matter without the support of the community.

Thank you for your consideration.

LegCircus 16:48, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about the harsh editing, I intend to have a good look at the article when I have time. There seem to be a lot of contributors on Wikipedia from American right-wing or so-called libertarian circles who like to insert political bias into articles. They hate articles about things like ACORN. I suggest bringing in some sympathetic people to try and restore some balance to the debate and only if that doesn't work listing it on RfC. — Trilobite 18:08, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for your statement. I really was starting to feel like by joining wikipedia I had accidentally walked into a libertarian convention. I wonder why there are so many here. A fair amount of anarchists as well. It's very curious.

I will list on RfC. I don't, as yet, know many folks to ask for help.

LegCircus 00:41, Sep 9, 2004 (UTC)

Welcome messages

Thanks for your note on my talk page. No questions at the moment, but I'll come back fast enough if I do!

--Cje 09:00, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome!

Fr3d 14:14, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Questions from Wilz

Another thank you for your welcome from me! It is so nice to have someone come and say something to you after messing around the system for a while! Thanks thanks thanks!!! Wilz 20:27, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

By the way, I did something here which I'm not completely sure is the right thing to do. Could you take a look at it? And how exactly is the removal process done. I've read help files from left and right and still don't have a clear idea. Does a sys_op go through the Copyright Problems page and decide for themselves whether it should be removed, or do they wait for discussion/votes from others? If there is no new information posted, will it still be deleted? Hope you can reply to this in my talk page. Wilz 20:32, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

You did the right thing on Multimedia University. I am not a sysop and I don't often deal with copyright violations but as I understand it the article will just be deleted after a certain amount of time (the delay allowing its contributor to set the record straight if necessary, such as if they were the author of the page the article appeared to be copied from). Looking at the edit history of the article all the plagiarised text seems to have been added several months ago by someone who made no other contributions. I doubt anyone will be rushing to call for the article's reinstatement. Your link to the other page is sufficient evidence for a sysop to come along and delete the article some time in the next few days. You haven't done anything wrong anyway! Thanks for flagging up the copyvio, most of them are spotted quickly but this one seems to have been there a while. — Trilobite 20:46, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I'm rewriting the article since that I'm a student of the university and all. I guess it'll be my first article in Wikipedia :) (Btw - how do you do post both your username and the talk in brackets next to it? I'm doing it manually. Wilz (Talk) 20:32, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

In Special:Preferences there is a "your nickname" box. Anything in this box is put between a set of [[ and ]] when you sign a post. If you change it to Wilz]] [[User_talk:Wilz|(Talk) it will retain the normal link to your user page and add one to your talk page. This is entirely optional and most people don't bother (although some people seem to have very elaborate and sometimes even excessive signatures). You can change your signature to just about anything. Hope this helps. — Trilobite 21:11, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Completed my first article on Wikipedia. Could you please go and have a look at the temp of Multimedia University? I hope it gets in sooner or later hehe. Also - I feel that the article needs editing. How do people eventually arrive at articles that need cleaning up or haven't been worked on much? Is there like a list of newest articles or articles being worked on, or is it usually someone clicking random page? Should I mark the page for clean up? And can anyone just create a Talk:Something page in the community portal? Thanks for all your help. Wilz (Talk) 21:52, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Your article looks very good and while people will probably come across it and edit it in various ways (like all Wikipedia articles, though some may go for months without an edit) it doesn't need to be listed for cleanup, as that's only for really messed up articles with incoherent sections or duplicated information, etc. People come across articles in various ways: there are lists of new pages and recent changes, but there are many other ways of coming across them, particularly if they are linked from other pages. I'm not sure what you meant by your question about the community portal. What you are referring to is the concept of namespaces, so for example there is the User: namespace for user pages, the Wikipedia: namespace for internal matters, the main namespace where the articles go and the Talk: namespace for discussing them. "Talk:Something" would be the discussion page for the article "Something", and probably wouldn't have much to do with the Community Portal. To try to answer your question though, generally anyone can create any page they like, though if someone creates a page called hf38fdbb90hr3e980hjd4n3y7y8d90ffcgrwesrtys someone else will probably come along and delete it. — Trilobite 10:38, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I was searching for information on coffee and came across this page for Mocha. I noticed that the page gives the main definition as the coffee version of Mocha, although it does mention a number of other definitions. Shouldn't the page be split into a disambiguity page that links to each of the definitions - coffee, seaport and rapper? I'm unsure about the usual practice in this case, and would like to check first before doing anything. Wilz (Talk) 14:28, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

As there is currently no more than a sentence on each of the possible meanings, they are all fine on one page. This is similar to the first type of disambiguation. If someone wrote enough on any of the topics to merit its own article then the situation would change, but as it stands this page is fine, if a little messy, so I have tried to clean it up a bit. — Trilobite 18:18, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Systemic bias

Hi, if you wish to help contribute to a beta version of a Wikipedia page section designed to counter-act Wikipedia's systemic bias, please sign the bottom of this section on the Village pump - Wikipedia:Village_pump#Systemic_bias_in_Wikipedia. If not, no worries.--Xed 03:54, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I have signed up. — Trilobite 12:26, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

See User:Xed/CROSSBOW. Please feel free to add to the discussion. --Xed 12:57, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Questions from Jerry cornelius

Hi – thanks for the welcome message and editing tips you left at my page. I have a quick question for you. I’m trying to find out whether there’s a problem with the wikipedia servers between around 10am and 11am UK time (which would be 5-6am EST). The system seems to slow down considerably around about then and is sometimes impossible to access altogether. I’d really like to know where I can get a question like this answered – is it at ‘village pump’. Also, do you happen to know whether there are any usenet newsgroups which are dedicated to thinks Wiki? Seems to me that editing pages like this is a bit clumsy.

Thanks again.

Incidentally, how do I add the 'help' links and a table like the one at the top at this page which automatically updates content?

Jerry cornelius 11:21, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I can't say I've noticed particular problems with the servers at this time, but Wikipedia is prone to slowness. The village pump (or probably its new technical section) would be a good place to ask about such things. I'm not sure about usenet groups, but I do know that outside of the Wikipedia site itself there are the mailing lists and an IRC channel, neither of which I have ever had any call to use. Most discussion of the project takes place on the Wikipedia: pages of the site itself, though for overarching project matters there is also meta: which you could have a look at. There is also something called Meatball Wiki which is a wiki about wikis if that makes any sense. I'm afraid I don't quite understand your question about help links, maybe you could explain a bit more about what you are trying to do? I think the table you are referring to is the automatic table of contents which appears of its own accord once a page has four headings or more on it, and does indeed update itself. Hope this helps, and if you have anything further to ask or I've misinterpreted any of your questions feel free to come back and ask. Thanks. — Trilobite 12:22, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Very many thanks for all that - and for getting back to me so quickly! When I said 'help' links what I meant to say was 'edit' links against each of the discussions on the talk page - sorry for the confusion. I see that your reply also appeared on my talk page - does that happen automatically? Thanks again - I've never been welcomed to an encyclopedia before! Jerry cornelius 14:40, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
It doesn't happen automatically but as new users are sometimes confused about how things like talk pages work I thought it best to duplicate my reply on your talk page so that you got the "new messages" alert instead of just expecting you to know to check back here. The edit links are automatic like the table of contents, and just appear next to headings unless your preferences are set up to not display them (by default they are displayed). Of course, it's always possible to edit the whole page including all the sections by using the "edit this page" link at the top of any article or talk page. Editing by section is particularly useful on lengthy talk pages. — Trilobite 14:48, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

HTML tags

Sorry bor the <B> and </B> but he ''' methode worked with the ' from site's so it thats why a thougt the <B> method was better. User:kristof vt

No problem. — Trilobite 19:32, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Pirate radio

Thanks, I was looking for the means to actually write to you and I finally found the + symbol. I did add several new paragraphs in addition to the listing of stations which I expanded and corrected. The text paragraphs have reverted back to the original and thus incorrect lines such as "John Peel having worked for Radio Caroline" remain there. (He did the overnight show on Wonderful Radio London.) In the mention of famous individuals I originally added an MP from Radio 270 and Ted Allbuery the writer who created Radio 390. Unfortunately this copy was also changed back to the original and therefore deleted.

I also added text (I did not delete any text) to the French section because "Pirate Radio" began in Britain when an Englishman began to create a network of stations on the contintent before WWII. Someone noted that Radio Luxembourg is not in France, but short of creating yet another paragraph and since the Luxembourg broadcasts were related tp those from Radio Normandie in France, I left one heading and because the French era began before the British era (or rather the original French ere WAS the original British era), I swapped the order and placed France first and the UK second.

Another issue arose when one one of the Wiki posters questioned whether a legal station in one country could be a "pirate" in another country and the answer is yes. That was the entire basis of the UK Wireless License and the reason why Radio Luxembourg was denied land lines before and after WWII.

To a less extent the same thing was true with the now defunct border blasters like XERF in Mexico whose audience was in the USA.

The same issue came up again with Alan Weiner's Radio Newyork International of 1988 and the court case that came out of that. Weiner tried to get around it by claiming that he had registered his ship in Roy Bates' "Principality of Sealand", which is why Bates has tried to keep these two subject separated. But in 1990 and again in 1991 an FCC Administrative Court in Washington, DC heard this case and the UK was represented concerning the status of "Sealand".

That issue was settled by the findings of the court in 1991. It was that issue that caused Ryan Lackey to accuse Roy Bates of lying to him over the establishment of Havenco. All of these topics are related. It would take me some time to do it, but little by little I would also be happy to add and cross reference this material. Please let me know your opinion on all of this.

I still have the copy and I can rework it to create a "Contintent of Europe" section first to separate it from the French section which will mean that the UK section will be second and the French third. I also have material to contribute about China and other countries, including the Netherlands and Israel.

Finally, I went back and added an "MV" or "SS" before the ships, so that it would easier on the eyes to distinguish the name of a ship from the name of a station. This last change was also removed in favor of my original listing, I don't know why and it would be better if it was put back.

I am willing and happy to make these changes and additions as long as my intentions are understood in that it won't get wiped out by another sudden reversal.

Please advise me about my suggestions for corrections and new additions as outlined above, Thanks MPLX 20:50, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Well you seem to know what you're talking about as far as matters concerning pirate radio are concerned, so hopefully others will come to appreciate this. I'm sorry to hear you have been met with hostility amongst Wikipedians, but now you have a registered user account instead of editing anonymously it's much easier for everyone to keep track in their own minds of who you are. From what I've read there was some kind of all-out war with a vandal or group of vandals and you got caught in the crossfire with people assuming you were vandalising. What I suggest you do is go back and make your edits again, if necessary by reverting whoever assumed you were a vandal (see this page for how to do this). If you do anything particularly drastic to an article or insert something that could reasonably be seen as controversial it's best to provide a brief justification on the article's talk page, and if you get reverted again try to engage whoever's doing it in discussion. In any case, provide a short but informative edit summary for each edit you do. I'm not in a position to judge whether whoever reverted your edits before was acting in good faith or is a problem user of some kind, but I suggest you give them the benefit of the doubt unless they start behaving unreasonably again. If you have any more problems you can always come back and let me know and I'll see what I can do. Thanks for your patience, and good luck. — Trilobite 21:16, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Mirror site

Hi again. Another question,I'm afraid. Last night I came across an entry for Robert Fitzroy. While using Google to find out some other information about him (the date on which a sea area was renamed after him), I discovered this page http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Robert%20Fitzroy Much of the text on this page is identical to the wikipedia entry. So my question is, what do I do next. There's no copyright attribution that I can see at 'freedictionary' - which itself seems to be not particularly good version of wikipedia. Should I list the page for deletion? Jerry cornelius 10:55, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Freedictionary is one of a large number of sites run by people who are essentially no different from spammers and who reproduce Wikipedia content on ad-filled sites (which under the GFDL they are perfectly entitled to do), but with the bare minimum of compliance to the licence they can get away with. Buried down the bottom of their page in very small print is a notice saying the article is a reproduction of Wikipedia content. To cut a long story short the article is ours not theirs. There are copyright violations that people have inserted into Wikipedia, and if you come across one the way to deal with it can be found at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. VfD is for other matters, like if someone creates an article about their cat. Copyvios (as they are known) aren't supposed to go through VfD, and that's why RickK, a man who for reasons I'm not sure I understand doesn't appreciate people messing with VfD, pulled you up on it. No harm done though! Thanks for your vigilance. — Trilobite 12:03, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Image tag trolling

Please don't incorrectly label images such as Image:Englishcoatofarms.png as public domain. The image has no source and there is absolutely no indication that the image is public domain.

Perhaps you could tell me who might own the copyright to this image. Something as ubiquitous and ancient as the English coat of arms isn't eligible for copyright. Try to imagine a court case in which someone attempted to prevent someone else from using this coat of arms on the grounds that they owned the copyright. Wouldn't happen, would it? Also please sign your posts, and please get an account if you want to be taken seriously. There's nothing wrong with contributing anonymously but if you want any credibility when you try to lecture registered users on matters of policy you would be well advised to get an account. — Trilobite 23:40, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Whoever created this particular rendering of the English coat of arms would have a copyright on the image. Do you know who that would be? What is the source of the image, when was it made and by whom? If you can't answer those questions, you can't in good conscious label the image as public domain.

You can't claim copyright on a simple rehash of a public domain image or symbol: there has to be significant creative input. Furthermore, the user who uploaded the image would have ticked the box to say that what they were contributing was acceptable under Wikipedia's copyright policy, so we can assume at the very least GFDL. If they got the image from somewhere else and it's under copyright that's their problem, and if you want to report it as a copyvio you need to say where else you have found it. Also please sign your posts, and please get an account if you want to be taken seriously. There's nothing wrong with contributing anonymously but if you want any credibility when you try to lecture registered users on matters of policy you would be well advised to get an account. — Trilobite 23:49, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
What's more, your edit summaries are incorrect. You don't need to give a source for an image to label it as public domain. This only applies if the image would otherwise be assumed to be under copyright, but has been released into the public domain by the copyright holder. — Trilobite 23:54, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Unless you can offer source information for the image, the image can not be labeled as public domain. There certainly is creative input in how the coat of arms is drawn (the style of the lions just as an example). BTW, User:Dagestan has a history of uploading images of dubious copyright.

The creative input in this case is minimal. It wouldn't stand up in court. As I have explained above there is no need to offer source information. The English coat of arms was around for centuries before anyone came up with the idea of copyright. I'm afraid you are wrong to say that I "can't in good conscious [sic] label the image as public domain." Also please sign your posts, and please get an account if you want to be taken seriously. There's nothing wrong with contributing anonymously but if you want any credibility when you try to lecture registered users on matters of policy you would be well advised to get an account. — Trilobite 00:04, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

You are insisting on labeling an image with no source or copyright information as 'public domain'. The image should remain labeled as unverified until source information is given. Your opinion that it contains no creative input is just that, your opinion. Please try to err on the side of caution instead of making claims based on your opinion.

Can you read? I have explained to you that source information is not required for such an image. No one claiming copyright of this image would win a court case. You know this very well and yet you persist in spouting nonsense. — Trilobite 00:36, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I understand you have labelled the "U.S. Highway marker" images as 'unverified'. You should know that I actually drew these images myself. I got the base "shield" image from the U.S. Federal Highway Administration's "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices", which is a public domain document (U.S. Federal Government), and the digits are stored as individual bitmaps on my home computer. Consequently, these images should be labelled as public domain. Denelson83 23:52, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Ah, that wasn't me. I labelled them public domain but there is an anonymous troll going round after me changing all my PD tags to unverified (see discussion above). — Trilobite 23:54, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thank you Dnelson83 for providing source information for these previously unverified images. Your contributions to wikipedia are appreciated. Also, please don't resort to name calling, Trilobite.

Once again, the images were not "previously unverified" without source information. The designs they are derived from were produced by the US government, placing them in the public domain automatically. — Trilobite 00:07, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The only information that the images contained with regard to source was for example "Route marker sign: U.S. Highway 36". Nothing about public domain or the US government. However there is no point in arguing any further since Denelson83 has indicated that he produced these images himself. (On a side note, please remember which works of the US government are public domain. Only "a work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States [Federal] Government as part of that person's official duties". This of course means this doesn't apply to US state or local governments and that images hosted by a government website do not have to be public domain, it is only works of US federal government employees that are public domain.)

They are US federal highways, employees of the federal government come up with the symbols and publish the relevant manual, and yes they do all this as part of their official duties. You are quite clearly fully aware of all this. You are nothing but a troll, and I wouldn't be surprised if you were a banned user trying to mess people about. I can't think why else you have made it your crusade to mark images as unverified which are undoubtedly in the public domain. If you are concerned about the presence of copyright violations on Wikipedia there are several thousand untagged images you could be looking through, but you choose to argue pointlessly over these. I am not prepared to discuss this inconsequential bullshit any further, as it has proven impossible to talk sense into you. Go and annoy someone else. — Trilobite 00:36, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Systemic bias (redux)

We seem to be almost ready to go live with Wikipedia:WikiProject countering systemic bias. I know you were interested earlier. Xed seems to have dropped out, so we are back to the broader focus I was advocating (not just Third World countries). I'd love to have you aboard. Please, sign up as a participant and also, please weigh soon in on anything you'd like to see changed before we really announce this. -- Jmabel 23:41, Oct 4, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I have been away for Wikipedia for a few days so I haven't kept track of how things have been progressing but I have just taken a look at the WikiProject page and it seems some good work has gone into it. I agree with you about the broader focus, though as I'm sure you agree such matters as the history and politics of Chad are important topics for Wikipedia. I have high hopes for this project and I will certainly sign up but my contributions may be sporadic over the next few weeks. Thanks again. — Trilobite 13:26, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Foreshore and seabed article

Thanks for your comment about the New Zealand foreshore and seabed controversy article — it's nice to know that its being of some use. I didn't really expect it to get much attention from anyone outside New Zealand. -- Vardion 09:24, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

UK collaboration of the week

You voted for Culture of the United Kingdom, this week's UK Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 01:58, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Immigration to the United Kingdom

The main article would be Immigration to the United Kingdom. There isn't one. There is an Immigration to the United States though if you're looking for a model to work from. If writing a whole section on immigration start with a section heading and under that write Main article: Immigration to the United Kingdom. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 12:06, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. I think there is potential for a really good article here. I think the history of immigration is crucial to the understanding of British culture of the late 20th century. I will have a think about how such an article can be written. — Trilobite 12:09, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
It could make a good UK Collaboration of the week, if you want to propose it. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 12:11, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I got about a sentence into the first draft of such an article before I realised what a mammoth task it would be. I think I will wait until Culture of the United Kingdom has been filled out before trying to work out where it would fit into the grand scheme of things — which periods of history would be covered etc. — Trilobite 12:29, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Apology

look im sorry for doing that i thought it was correct information now get off my back Monkeyturtle 11:25, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Aylesford article

Hi there! I had a large amount of info i wrote off net and have now put it in. I see you did three small amendments since I first started - but I cannot see where they are. Perhaps you would be so good as to re-insert them - and may be check my piece as it now stands? Thanks Peter Shearan Peter Shearan 20:40, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I think you have me confused with someone else. I haven't edited that article before. — Trilobite 20:44, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I had a look at the page history and saw that someone called Redlentil made three small amendments. I wonder if you thought that was me because on that user's talk page there is a welcome message left by me? This is the only way I can see you would have arrived at my user page from that article. I might have a look at Aylesford now you've brought it to my attention as it looks in need of a bit of formating to conform to Wikipedia Style. Looks like a good article though! — Trilobite 20:51, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Turing photo

Hi Trilobite, I'm surprised to hear there's a copyright issue with the Turing pic, as it's a very common one used all over the Internet, in books, newspapers etc. Can you send me the link for the website that says it owns the copyright, please, so I can check it out? Many thanks, Slim 02:43, Dec 27, 2004 (UTC)

Here's the link: [1]. The image on that page has "© NPG" down the side, and at the bottom it says, "All images and text are subject to copyright protection," with a link to their copyright info. Hope this helps. — Trilobite 02:56, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia suggestions

I read your thoughts on http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Trilobite/Thoughts I have a stub Wikipedia:User Suggestions. Can you put some suggestion in it?

Zain 23:19, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar

Ooh my very first barnstar, I am flattered. Actually I fully support the idea of the barnstars: we should have more positive encouragement of regular contributors, I just never got enthusiastic about it before because no-one ever thought to give me one... -- Francs2000 | Talk [[]] 00:28, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Geo-stubs

Good work on all of the geo-stubs. RickK 10:07, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. They are the first stage in a kind of manually-created Rambot series for one of the counties of Northern England. There are a lot to do. — Trilobite 10:13, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Common Worship article

Thanks for reformatting my article Common Worship. It looks very nice now. -- Anonymous, 11 Jan 2005

Thanks for the note and thanks for contributing the article. — Trilobite 13:53, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Akrotiri and Dhekelia vote

I urge you to reconsider your vote on the inclusion of Akrotiri and Dhekelia as dependencies in Europe at Template talk:Europe. The CIA World Factbook now lists them [2] as dependencies of the UK and has separate entries for the two ([3] & [4].) They also have this note posted on the main page [5]:

Recent confirmation that the United Kingdom Government administers the Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia on Cyprus as dependencies (and not as lease areas like the US Guantanamo Bay Naval Station in Cuba) has required a changing of their status and their addition to the Factbook as new entities.

Thanks. —Cantus…☎ 06:12, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks but having considered the matter I have decided not to change my vote. Trilobite 09:08, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Titan disambiguation

I see no reason not to endorse a little flexibility on this point--perhaps the redirect ought to be to Titan (moon) at least for the present. Instinctively I assumed that Titan (mythology) would be the most sensible target for primary topic disambiguation, but I'm coming around to the idea that the moon may well be the most common topic by a wide margin (even after the current fuss has died down). My assumption seems to have been the result of a classical education.

Should the redirect to primary topic disambiguation prove stable over time, then Titan (moon) can be moved to Titan. I think this would be far preferable to equal disambiguation. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 13:03, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Fair enough. I would usually agree that Titan (mythology) was primary because it was the original meaning, but with Huygens in the news I'm sure the moon article will be bombarded with hits. I'll leave it up to you where all our redirects and disambiguation notices point. — Trilobite 13:08, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Image tagging

Greetings. You recently changed the tags on a few images to unverified, and I have changed them back. I'd like to explain my reasoning.

  • On Image:Abdulhamid I.jpg, this is a crop of [6], a painting from the 18th century. So I have tagged it ((PD-old)).
  • For Image:1801.gif, this is a tricky case. (There are several other similar images of airplane plans.) On Wikipedia:Image recreation requests, we looked at the possibility of recreating the image, and decided that the image contained no artistic information. The specs are all PD, and drawing out the specs adds no creative content. (See [7].) But this is a difficult case. What do you think? – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 14:27, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I hadn't realised these images had been discussed before. For the second one I assumed when I saw it that a diagram of a plane that someone had drawn couldn't be regarded as having no original authorship, as the tag stated, but if the specs are PD I will trust your judgement. — Trilobite 14:36, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

BiNet USA stub

Nice stub rewrite. Thanks (and I hope I speak for the original author as well). HyperZonktalk 19:08, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)

Merging

The page is camped with near religious zeal by User:John Gohde, a user who has been twice banned by the arbcom for his edit warring. More or less the only way to get anything done on that or any other page related to alternative health is with a binding vote of one kind or another. Snowspinner 14:01, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I've looked into the matter a bit and I'll be casting my vote for deletion. A binding vote would appear to be necessary in this case. — Trilobite 14:14, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Jèrriais

Thanks for the message. The delay in replying is due to my having been away in far-flung Guernsey, inspecting some papers on Jèrriais phonetics in the library (and taking the opportunity to do some further research into the history of Dgèrnésiais literature as a sideline). As for the future of Jèrriais, it's unlikely to ever become again the main medium of communication in Jersey given the nature of the economy and the media influences of Jersey's neighbours, but as they say in Wales: Bilingualism is the future.

No subjects are currently taught through the medium of Jèrriais in Island schools, although cross-curricular elements of geography, history and maths are incorporated in the lessons - and reading Jèrriais is (as far as the teachers are concerned) part of the literacy strategy. A Jèrriais-medium primary unit is an aim of the teaching programme. Man vyi 22:20, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Welcome message

Thank you for the welcome note. I enjoyed rummaging around the "how-to" links, and then one led to another...and another. I found the Wikipedia fact-checking project, and a list of articles missing citations. I am trying to include web references for an article or two... but not many guidelines about this, are there? Thank you for your welcome. It's good fun! Otto 03:27, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. The best place to go for guidelines about articles missing citations might be Wikipedia:Cite sources. It has plenty to say about things like citation style. Hope you enjoy Wikipedia! — Trilobite 13:28, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Spanish referendum

Hi Trilobite!

Pleased to talk with you and thank you for your support! Sometimes it's a bit difficult to me to translate all my ideas into English, but people like you helps me go on.

Well, I suppose that the lower 'yes' vote in both Catalonia and the Basque Country (as well as Navarra) in the referendum was due to the influence of some secessionist parties like Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya (in Catalonia) or Eusko Alkartasuna (in the Basque Country) which promoted the 'no' vote, in part because of the no-recognition of Catalan and Basque as EU official languages, but chiefly because the Constitution doesn't recognise the right of self-determination of peoples.

I hope you have understood the situation in those provinces. By the way, where are you from?

Regards from Spain! --Carlos Quesada 14:22, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Habeas corpus

Why did you remove the section on habeas corpus from Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe? Could you explain so on it's talk page?

See Talk:Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe. — Trilobite 18:27, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe

Hi there. Thanks for your message on my talk page:

I think it's a good idea then for there to be a few people who can keep an eye on the article and have broadly similar ideas about how it should be structured, what should be included, etc.

Agreed. I suggest two or three people, max, who are happy to check regularly and keep things in hand. You also seem like an excellent candidate. Another user who's contributed lots of helpful material recently is Aris Katsaris.

I wonder how much detail you think we should go into in the main article?

Less than currently! On the talk page for the article, I've suggested making a separate article for each broad heading and linking from summaries on the main article.

There's also the problem of people adding strange things to the bit about what's in the Constitution, or what's controversial about it.

I guess this is always going to be a problem for a subject which raises so many hackles. Hopefully, by breaking the article up into History, Content and Objections pages, we can easily keep the Content page clean (by simply ruling POV edits out of order and removing them), then focus our efforts on keeping the Objections page rich and balanced.

There are a lot of factually inaccurate claims around about the constitution. In my opinion, as long as they are reasonably common claims, they do deserve coverage on the 'Objections' page - together, as always, with balancing remarks ("Defenders of the constitution point out that…") and a note where necessary pointing out that the accuracy of these claims is disputed.

What do you think? Wombat 10:04, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Good stuff, replied on Talk:Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe. — Trilobite 21:57, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Teletraffic

Just to confuse us, I think Teletraffic is not one of the witless people from wits university. Check his contribs and see what you think. -- RHaworth 14:32, 2005 Mar 9 (UTC)

You're probably right. I should have been a bit more careful with that one. Thanks for letting me know. I've taken him/her off the page. — Trilobite 14:38, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

...for your support and kind words on my adminship nomination. See you around at CSB!

On a sidenote, I had an email exchange with Xed:

M — PS On my Talk page you'll find a conversation between Trilobite and me about your /draft5. We thought that even the draft version is worth releasing into public space. Do you agree with us ripping it from your space and putting it live? We'd do it by a page move, so that the history would be kept.
Incidentally, the images in there are not yet tagged for copyright. They could get deleted this way; if you can let me know where they are from and under which license there are released, I can tag them.
X — (...) I would prefer all my pages under the name Xed (main, drafts, talk) to be blanked and locked, and if possible, deleted. Judging from what Snowspinner regards as "notable" and what he regards as worthless (an opinion endorsed by other admins by my ban), I don't think the kind of articles I write have any place on Wikipedia.

So... — mark ✎ 21:32, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Oh dear, that would be very bad news if we had to delete draft5 with all the useful information it contains. Work like that is unlikely to be reproduced anytime soon, as that information isn't readily available on some web page to be nicely summarised and slotted in, like much of Wikipedia's content is. It would be unfortunate if Xed, who made such commendable efforts to improve Wikipedia's coverage, ended up having his own very good draft deleted. While it may be a little unethical to go ahead and use a draft against the author's wishes, there is the message below the edit box that says "if you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, do not submit it," which as far as I am aware applies to user pages as much as the article space, and I can't help but think that the "common good", as it were, ought to take priority over Xed's understandable anger about the way his work was dismissed. If Snowspinner or anyone else does regard such work as "worthless", then they can be safely ignored. Xed knows as well as we do that there are a lot of people—contributors as well as readers—who have very different opinions to that about what Wikipedia should cover, and that we'd all like to see an article like draft5 included, regardless of the circumstances surrounding its creation. My feeling is that if, as Jimbo Wales has stated, the moral mission of Wikipedia is to put a free and comprehensive encyclopedia on the desk of every schoolchild in Africa, the need to include articles about the culture of their countries is rather more important than any disputes that might have arisen among those who wrote Wikipedia. I don't like the idea, however, that in trying to make good use of Xed's work we end up doing the opposite of what he wants done with it. I wonder what you think ought to be done in this case? — Trilobite 00:33, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Sorry for not getting back to you sooner. As you might have seen, a week ago Xed asked me to blank his user page and subpages, which I did. Now Xed has asked User:Sannse to delete his user page and all subpages, which she did. Afterwards, she restored his User and Talk pages, to redirect them to Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians (as is the policy for users that have left Wikipedia and/or have requested deletuserion of their user page). It seems to be an accomplished fact that we have to forget about /draft5 altogether. It's really sad. — mark ✎ 17:03, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This is a disaster! I don't know why I didn't just unilaterally move it into the main namespace. I'm unhappy that rules are adhered to to the extent that good work is thrown away. It also annoys me that Xed would want to withhold a useful article like that because of his ban. I should have at least kept a personal copy as I did know it was at risk of deletion. Google never indexed it so I can't fetch it from their cache either. The only remaining possibility is that it comes up on archive.org after their six-month delay, but I don't hold out much hope. I suppose no one in particular is to blame, but I am pissed off anyway. A model CSB article lost forever. — Trilobite 17:30, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Can I email you? — mark ✎ 19:01, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Yep, I've just put my email address in to my preferences (haven't needed this function before) so you can try but I don't know if it will work. I tried sending one to myself and it didn't get through, but then that's probably supposed to happen. — Trilobite 19:17, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

SlimVirgin's RfA

Trilobite, thank you very much for voting for me in my adminship nomination, and for your kind comment. I very much appreciate your support. SlimVirgin 01:00, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)

Amazon spammer

Thanks for following up on the Amazon spammer and removing his junk. -Deadcorpse 23:16, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

Kyrgyzstan stubs

Hi Trilobite - I see you've just created two new stub categories for Kyrgyzstan - I hope you cleared them at Wikipedia Stub sorting. In the case of the geo-stub, I'm certain you didn't, since it cuts across the current stub categories (Kyrgyzstan doesn't have enough geo-stubs for a separate category - well below threshold, in fact - which is why they're sorted into Category: Central Asia geography stubs). If you wish to help out with stub sorting (and please do!), get involved at WP:WSS - you'll find all the information about the debate process prior to stub category creation there! Grutness|hello? 12:29, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I didn't get them cleared. I wasn't aware that such a process had been implemented. I assumed it wouldn't ruffle too many feathers if I created a couple of new categories in areas where a precedent had been set - i.e. a stub and geo-stub template for a country that didn't have them yet. One of the reasons why they have almost no articles at this precise moment is that I haven't populated them yet. There are quite a few stubs that could be categorised in this way, and I had assumed that most if not all countries would get stub and geo-stub categories eventually. Sorry for not following the guidelines. You can delete them if you want, but if you don't they will be getting quite a few articles in them over the next few days as I am currently expanding our coverage of Kyrgyzstan, which will involve the creation of plenty of stubs. Thanks for all the great work you do with stub-sorting. I help out in a peripheral way as I go along, by moving non-specific geo-stubs into their specific country categories and that kind of thing. — Trilobite 20:53, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The clearance process isn't 100% compulsory - more of a courtesy really, but in the case of geo-stubs the whole system was overhauled a couple of months ago. Having a kyrg-geo-stub probably won't matter as long as it's populated, but every country is already covered in some way by one of the geo-stub categories so that the categories are worthwhile. The real problem is when a stub category's created which will remain empty or directly opposes a stub scheme that's been organised. There's no point having a geo-category if a country's only going to have a couple of stubs (as happened when someone tried to create a Guam-geo-stub yesterday!). In the case of the four former Soviet republics in Central Asia, it made quite a bit of sense to group them together since there were only about 90 stubs between them (even with including Mongolia in the same category), and quite a few of the articles overlap several of the countries. But if you're planning to write a few more, then it will be of use. Thanks for the help with the stub sorting... I'll go through the CAsia-geo-stub category and see what can be moved over to Kyrg-geo-stub. (Oh, and sorry if I sounded grumpy! :) Grutness|hello? 23:26, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
No problem, you didn't sound grumpy, and thanks for explaining the situation. I'll leave it to your discretion whether you keep it or not, but if it stays I will ensure there are a respectable number of stubs in each category. — Trilobite 23:32, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

A Treasure's Trove of Deranged Lunatics?

That's some interesting stuff you've found on this Treasure guy. At first I was convinced that the author is the guy spamming here, but now I'm not sure. Could it be an obsessed fan of the book? I searched in Google News for this book, and one story that came up said that author "is a millionaire computer software guy who always wanted to write a book and finally did." I'm not sure a millionaire would relentlessly add amazon referral links to Wikipedia articles. Also, his IP was traced to Pfizer, which is weird. On the other hand, if these IPs actually belong to that Michael Stadher guy, he is one weird dude. On top of having an obsession with Britney Spears, the culprit has vandalized my user page and others, which is a really immature move for an author of children's books.

And what is a "treasure's trove" anyway? I've heard of the term "treasure trove", but not the possesive form he uses. I'm stunned that his book is apparently ranked #150 on the amazon list. His website also said that the winner of the supposed treasure hunt will win over $1 million in jewels. Sounds like a scam to me. I hope we find some more info about this whole thing.

As far as my user page? It's just some nonsense I put up there because I didn't want a blank page. It's meant to be a joke, but it's probably mostly offensive and I'll replace it at some point. I don't actually hate Nauru, but it did annoy me that the nation declared bankruptcy. They sold off all their resources, which were stockpiles of phosphates, and then went broke. What kind of country goes bankrupt?

And the Third Amendment? It's an amendment that I find funny. It's basically an overreaction to the British Quartering Act and seems out of place to me. And my hatred of old-time bicycles? That's just a Simpsons reference. And my dumb, redundant username? I have no idea. -Deadcorpse 05:23, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

User languages

I've left (you) a question on Category talk:User languages. If you respond, please do so there. Thanks! —msh210 15:55, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Done. — Trilobite 16:12, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

BanyanTree's RfA

Hi Trilobite, Thank you for your vote at my nomination. Your support means a lot to me and I look forward to helping out as an admin. Cheers, BanyanTree 03:40, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

An Garda Síochána

I have been reformatting the requested moves vote to make it easier to read. Because you expressed you opinion before the formal WP:RM request I have not added your name to the Talk:An Garda Síochána#Requested move vote. If you wish to vote then please do so. Philip Baird Shearer 13:47, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for drawing my attention to the vote. — Trilobite 18:12, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

English, English, English...

Hi again Trilobite:

Just a grammatical doubt... is it the same to say "it's a city belonging to that country" and "it's a city located in that country"???

Regards. --Waninoco 20:22, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi. Most of the time those two would mean just about the same thing, however I think if you're writing an article or something the second one is better, simply because the first is about possession and the second is about location. The first one would be okay in, for example, "Ceuta is a city belonging to Spain," when it's outside of the main part of the country, but it would sound a bit odd to say "Paris is a city belonging to France." Also, the located bit isn't really needed. I think "Geneva is a city in Switzerland" sounds best. This is just the reaction of a standard native speaker of course—I'm no grammar expert. Other people might have a different opinion on this. — Trilobite 18:12, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I can't resist throwing in some pedantry here. Native speakers are the de facto grammar experts. I think you made your case more clear than any grammar expert could do, because writing well is all about native speaker's intuitions (note that all three options are perfectly grammatical).
Thanks for your email by the way — I didn't reply because we agree on the matter. See you around! — mark ✎ 18:33, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thanks Mark, I appreciate the pedantry! As a non-linguist who's interested in linguistics and such, whenever I hear someone talking about people using "bad grammar" I feel a strong urge to tie them up and lecture them on my opinions of prescription and description, and now here I am telling someone to consult a grammar expert if they want a proper answer! Native speakers are indeed the grammar experts. Thank you for reminding me of this! — Trilobite 18:50, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your help. I agree with mark and I think that you English-speakers not only are de facto grammar experts (and even de iure), but also you must be it. I recommend you to read this article I found time ago at Newsweek Magazine's website: Not the Queen's English. Hasta la vista and thank you again! --Waninoco 19:57, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Welcome me? =)

Hi. I'm a new comer... and found my way here through some Welcoming Committee page. Will you welcome me and find my way around here. Didn't know where and how to ask so I wrote it here. Well? --Jack in the box 14:02, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! I've put some links you might find useful on your talk page. — Trilobite 16:05, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thank you for your interest. I really need to ask few questions probably won't be found through help or faq pages. Can I email you or pm you? — Jack in the box 13:36, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Well usually on Wikipedia just about all discussion is carried out on talk pages and user talk pages like this one, so to send me or anyone else a message you just put it on their talk page and a notice will appear when they next load a wiki page to tell them they have new messages. If you have any questions I'd be happy to answer them - you just need to leave a message here like you just have. — Trilobite 13:41, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

MEP stubs

Hi Trilobyte,

I have seen that you apparently created many MEP pages, apparently using a robot, very nice indeed. If your robot can also update pages which have not been changed since your robot created them in the first place, it will be very easy to extend the MEP stubs to have more information.

E.g. a page like the one of Pilar del Castillo Vera should be possible to create fully automatically if you use the data which I retrieved from the EP using a script.

The only exception of that would be for the information if the MEP was elected for the first time or if the MEP was already MEP in a previous term, but at least for the last two terms this is also possible to get.

It's best if you can email me using my wikipedia account's email and I can give you the data or/and the script. --NoSoftwarePatents 01:09, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your message, it's got me thinking. The MEP stubs weren't created with a robot, but manually, making extensive use of copy and paste, browser tabs, and other such helpful facilities. I gave up about halfway through and I still intend to finish the job one of these days. I don't know much about operating bots on Wikipedia (except that other people have made really great use of them) but I'd be happy to work with you to improve the MEP pages. The MEP database on the European Parliament's site is a useful resource, and if you've developed a script to pull information off it we have the potential to do a really good job of the pages. How about this for a proposal: If I work out a standard template for a basic MEP stub with fields that can be filled in using data from the EP website, your script could presumably produce all the several hundred articles which I would be happy to add to Wikipedia manually, which wouldn't take too much time and would allow for manual tweaks. Since I don't know much about using robots to do these things I'd be grateful for your feedback. It would be great if we could get something like this working. Putting the pages together is the labour-intensive part, and if you've got a script that can do this we are most of the way there already. Your example page is pretty close to what I have in mind, but I would like to have a think about the ideal format before we go ahead and create all the pages. What do you think? — Trilobite 02:08, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've put some rough ideas about what I'd like to see for the pages at User:Trilobite/MEP script. It would be good to hear what you think. — Trilobite 02:45, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've done some big updates and and fixes now, and the new uploaded source is (at least from my persprective) much better now. I've changed it to fit what you edited manually mostly, I think it's at about 90% of I could do. Have a look at your User:Trilobite/MEP script page for the details. --NoSoftwarePatents 07:17, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Babel categories

What are all of those "User" categories you're creating? RickK 08:40, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

They're part of this scheme to allow people to find users who speak certain languages. There are quite a few users in the categories for the bigger languages, but it seemed worth laying the foundations for all languages with Wikipedias having more than 100 articles so that people didn't come along and implement them in a haphazard non-standard way, and I was just finishing that task off. My apologies if I am flooding Special:Newpages or something. It's all done now. — Trilobite 08:48, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Ah. Thanks. RickK 08:49, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

Broken redirect

Hi Trilobite - thanks for fixing my wakefield regional council link - I couldn't work out how to do it - thanks again Brookie 19:34, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It still isn't working for me. I think they have turned off interwiki redirects after French wikipedians and others used to arrive at the village pump complaining that their user pages had been redirected to that particular notorious picture on en: and they had no obvious way of fixing it. — Trilobite 11:47, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Babel

Why'd you remove iw from the list? —msh210 18:03, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Basically because I couldn't understand what it was doing there. It just said "see Hebrew above". No templates or categories had been created for it and in any case "iw" isn't the code for Hebrew, and a Hebrew section already exists, so I couldn't work out why it had been added. The only thing I could guess was that "iw" was intended as a transliteration of the "עב" of "עברית", but I couldn't see why it needed to be on the page. Sorry if I've misunderstood what was being attempted there. — Trilobite 21:09, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
But iw is the code (actually, a code) for Hebrew! It and he are both codes for Hebrew. I added iw to the page so that someone who knows Hebrew and looks for it under iw will be able to find it. Unless you can convince me otherwise, I'd like to add it back. —msh210 17:39, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Well, okay, I'm not going to push it, but I'd be interested to know where it is written that "iw" is the code for Hebrew. In accordance with all the other Wikimedia projects that have implemented Babel templates I simply used the codes from the URLs of the various language versions of Wikipedia. These are based on ISO 639 for the most part and "iw" doesn't appear to exist in that scheme. The codes for Hebrew according to our article on ISO 639 are "he" and "heb". Also, do we really need these 'redirect' sections on the page? As far as I can see it just clutters things, and if we have that redirect, we ought really to have a full set. Someone might think that Chinese should also be mentioned under "chi" (a perfectly valid ISO 639 code, incidentally), or perhaps a Spanish speaker might look up German under "ale" because they know it as "alemán", so we'd have to leave a note at Aleut, etc. It quickly gets out of hand. I don't feel particularly strongly about this so I won't revert you if you add it back in. — Trilobite 18:19, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
You say I'd be interested to know where it is written that "iw" is the code for Hebrew. It's an old code, no longer recommended, but still (aparently) used some; it's from some version of ISO 639. —msh210 16:03, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know about that. As I said, I won't take it out if you add it in again. — Trilobite 16:12, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

MEP script

Hi Trilobite, I just wanted to put a quick notice here that I have now updated User:Trilobite/MEP script to make sure that you see it. I'm just putting this here as kind of "redirect" which we can delete. --NoSoftwarePatents 07:24, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've been keeping an eye on the page - some good updates. Slowly but surely I am getting there with uploading the individual articles. Thanks for all your work. — Trilobite 16:12, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Bjarki's RfA

Thank you for supporting my nomination on RfA, it failed because of Wikipedia's minority rule system, although I thought 21/8 support was sufficient. It was also cut short by 12 hours. But your vote of confidence is greatly appreciated, now let's build an encyclopedia! --Bjarki 13:52, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry the nomination failed. I think some people feel that en: is somehow the only Wikipedia that matters, and extensive admin experience in another language doesn't count for much. Hopefully you will be renominated sometime. — Trilobite 17:50, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Ah! I see the cabal has now relented and decided to enforce their own rules! Congratulations! — Trilobite 12:56, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Adminship nomination

Hey. I noticed your username popping up a lot over the course of my editing and I'd say you do a pretty good job. I always thought you were an admin and for some reason I decided to read your user page and was surpised to find that you're not an admin. In my opinion you're due for a nomination. Have you ever been nominated? If you are interested I'd like to nominate you. I'm relatively new here (22 days) so I've never nominated anyone before. I just think you'd be a great admin. — oo64eva (AJ) (U | T | C) @ 08:57, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind comments. I haven't been nominated before but I'd be very happy to accept adminship if it was offered. Thanks for offering to nominate me! — Trilobite 09:11, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Alright, I am going to generate your nomination here Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Trilobite. It should be done in a half hour or so as I am going to research your contributions a bit more. Many people dislike the RfA process because it can almost seem like a court room where they are being judged. Don't worry though, you should do fine. — oo64eva (AJ) (U | T | C) @ 09:18, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. I guess this is where people find out if they've made any enemies! — Trilobite 09:19, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Okay it's all set. Head over to your nomination and accept. You know the drill. Oh, and good luck! — oo64eva (AJ) (U | T | C) @ 10:15, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

Pope

Hi, Trib. Regarding my posts on the Pope page. These are quotes from the faz.com site. It's the English version of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Germany's largest (conservative) daily newspaper. You can read the article yourself, under the title "The views of new pope".

Message from a vandal!

Thanks for your response to my playful edit to the Pope entry--I'd read a piece in the Guardian about a fracas over the content, and since my students sometimes cite Wikipedia I was curious to see how easy it was to change content, and how quickly inappropriate content is removed. That said, when I have more time I'm curious to find out more about how more complex decisions about "appropriate" and "inappropriate" content are sorted out by the Wikipedia community. A playful adjective is one thing; inclusion or exclusion of substantive information is quite another. Anyway, fascinated by what's going on here--thanks.

Reply on User talk:69.173.200.3. — Trilobite 19:04, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Footnotes

Now that you deleted it, i got it! I just didn realize that these were footnotes because i started reading in the middle, at the part about your username. Maybe it would help if you inserted backlinks for lazy readers like me. — Sebastian (T) 21:18, 2005 Apr 24 (UTC)

Haha, you prompted me to get rid of it anyway, since it wasn't particularly amusing (I think I was in an odd mood when I added it). Thanks for the tip about the footnotes, they would probably be a good idea. Happy wiki-ing! — Trilobite 21:26, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations, Trilobite!

Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 06:17, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations on your promotion! I figured you wouldn't have much of a problem. I'm surprised it took this long before you were nominated. Thanks for making Wikipedia a better place, and now that you're an admin, I'm sure you'll fill those shoes very well. Take care, and I'm looking forward to working with you. — oo64eva (AJ) (U | T | C) @ 06:18, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
Congratulations. Based on the work I have seen you do around here, I was shocked you were not an admin until now. Anyway, good luck. Zzyzx11 | Talk 08:21, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Congratulations, and you're very welcome. Sjakkalle 13:59, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Congratulations, and you're very welcome. --Merovingian (t) (c) 14:47, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
Congratulations from me, too. It was a pleasure to support you. Filiocht | Blarneyman 14:49, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
And yet another from me! I have no doubt you'll be an excellent admin. Having those extra buttons makes working here so much easier. Antandrus 14:52, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
You have my full support as admin — I was on a sort of wikivacation so unfortunately I wasn't aware of your nomination... Congratulations! — mark ✎ 17:25, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Likewise! I'm glad I came off of Wikivacationing to give my support. Way to go!!! - Lucky 6.9 21:58, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Congratulations, Trilobite. It was my pleasure to support you. SlimVirgin (talk) 22:01, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
Welcome! --Tony Sidaway|Talk 23:38, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
And congratulations from me as well. You are very welcome. We could always use more invertebrates. — Knowledge Seeker দ 03:56, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Congrats from me too - no problems with the support; you'll be a good admin. Oh and thanks for the comment on my stub-work... what was it Dr Johnson said? "A harmless drudge"? :) Grutness|hello? 04:18, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
you are welcome, congratulations from me too. and thanks for putting in a word on El C's rfa. I have no problem with El C being turned down because he is a "commie", a "pov pusher", or not experienced enough, if that is how he is perceived. But unexplained opposition, or comments like "surely you jest" do get my goat, a little bit. dab (ᛏ) 06:29, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Yes, this unexplained opposition to people is something I will be watching out for in future. — Trilobite 03:13, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats! Andre (talk) 17:53, May 10, 2005 (UTC)

My thanks to all congratulants. — Trilobite 03:13, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pandeism VfD

Please consider changing your vote on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Pandeism to a "redirect" to pantheism. I believe I have adduced sufficient referential evidence to show that this article was not "original research," but simply a non-notably uncommon use of a term that is most commonly used as a reference to a word of similar construction. Since its very easy for those not acquainted with religous details to confuse "theism" with "deism" - as demonstrated by the fact that most of the non-wiki-mirror references on the web do use pandeism to mean pantheism - a redirect would be useful. -- 8^D BD2412gab 06:43, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC)

  • Forget the above. I have found conclusive evidence of the use of the term "Pandeism" dating back to 1833 [8], being used by Godfrey Higgins, a follower of John Toland, the creator of pantheism.[9]. The term is used in a book written by Higgins called the Anacalypsis. -- 8^D BD2412gab 10:27, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC)

Cricket portal

Hi. You commented on the move of the cricket portal to cricket. Having moved the whole affair back, I have made my own proposal. Could you come and comment, so that we can get consensus for the best version. Cheers, Smoddy (Rabbit and pork) 19:57, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

El_C's RfA

For your vote and very supportive comments during my RfA! I will not forget it. Your newest admin, El_C 01:21, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Page move vandalism

Hey Trilobite, I think you just accidentally deleted the actual UK election page after it had been restored to its proper place from the vandalism. I've restored it. john k 03:44, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. I was desperately trying to repair the damage left by the vandal and Wikipedia was running incredibly slowly while I was sending move and deletion requests, so I'm not quite sure how it all happened but at least it's been sorted out now. Thanks for fixing it! — Trilobite 04:13, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate article

I'm not trying to be difficult. I think that we have you a long list like we have in this case, that is is much more readable when it is presented in a table format. Are you dead set against having any table ? Parmaestro 07:26, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion continued at Talk:Signatories of the European Constitution. — Trilobite 12:21, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Now that you have the link to the article that you want, why are you removing all the links to the list of signatories ? Parmaestro 13:30, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Because you linked them in silly places. I give up. — Trilobite 13:36, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
In the first place, I wasn't the one that linked them. In the second place you kept the links in similar places in another article. It obviously doesn't matter, you will do what you want regardless of what other people want. You like lists so we'll only have lists. Have fun. Parmaestro 13:41, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
As I said above, I have given up. — Trilobite 13:42, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Good, that makes two of us. I shouldn't have had the audacity to question one of your edits and you shouldn't have to be bothered to explain it. Obviously, if you remove something, it's because it's silly or in a silly place. If it's in a silly place, it doesn't need to be put in a good place when we can just have no link instead. Parmaestro 14:18, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ITN: majority?

Hello, Trilobite. Thank you for your msg.

I may have misunderstood your edit summary yesterday at ITN: "not a simple majority - the reduced majority refers to the make-up of the HoC, not the share of the vote". I thought mentioning the HoC would be good enough for you, so I restored what it was before and added a link to the British House of Commons. The word 'simple' was not shown on screen at ITN.

I am no expert on this, but a simple majority to me is enough to rule. I thought this was the important point. Would a link to Absolute majority be better ? I'll edit ITN to simply link to majority for now. Please change it as you see fit.

Thanks. -- PFHLai 16:58, 2005 May 8 (UTC)

Glad that you agree with my version at ITN. Thanks.
In your example, "Labour 300, Conservatives 250, Lib Dems 100", Labour has 300 out of 650, i.e. less than half (or 325). On the Simple majority page, it says "more than half of the votes is necessary." So, Labour does not have 'simple majority' in this instance. I think that's plurality, but I ain't sure. As I wrote earlier, I am no expert on this ....
Cheers!
-- PFHLai 20:34, 2005 May 8 (UTC)
Ah! Now I think I understand where I was going wrong. Thank you. — Trilobite 20:58, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ecomuseum article

I am sorry, I wrote the chinese version and a little part of the french version. I would like someone to accomplish the english version. How should i proceed please? Thanks Zj 15:07, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, the translation is not really interestion. I talked about a lot of thing in China and France. I think the English version sould be totally different. Zj 16:52, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Queen Elizabeth II dispute

Please note that I have disputed the neutrality of this article. Jguk reverted my NPOV template, claiming that the NPOV dispute is just a personal campaign of one person. Whig 09:23, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Aye-aye vandal

Whats the matter with you? Don't you like aye-ayes? Jimbo

Aye've got nothing against them.... Aye'm just slightly puzzled about why you like to place them on my user page. — Trilobite 17:28, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Request to block

My friends like to vandalize with my name a lot, so it'd be best just to block me frome editing, thanks.

Reply on User talk:SocklordX. — Trilobite 14:16, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A vandal apologises

I'm sorry for editing the princeton university article. I'll never do it or anything like it again. Also, thank you for fixing the article.

Unusually remorseful for a wiki-vandal! But thanks, and don't worry, it's all easily fixed. — Trilobite 02:29, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:24.54.208.177

Any idea how this guy keeps editing even after he's blocked? RickK 04:17, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

It looks to me like he made no more edits after I blocked him just before 3:00. I am not sure quite what is going on, however. — Trilobite 04:33, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please block User:195.93.21.102

This user has continued to vandalise after your warning. Please consider a block. Lupin 21:30, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to block, but unfortunately this IP appears to be an AOL proxy used by many different people, some of whom have made good contributions and some of whom have vandalised. Being a relatively new admin I would rather not get involved in blocking in these kinds of cases, as I will probably get angry emails from legitimate contributors asking to be unblocked. Luckily it seems there is mainly low-level vandalism coming from this IP, and not some kind of major rampage. — Trilobite 01:05, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Starfleet ranks and insignia

Please comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Starfleet ranks and insignia. I'm particularly worried that the article goes into more detail than almost all readers would be interested in reading (not going into so much detail is a FAC criteria). Thus longer sections should be summarized and the detail spun off into daughter articles, allowing readers to zoom to that level of detail if they so choose. --mav 16:23, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree with you, and I've also added my own objections. — Trilobite 00:46, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

AlisterMcMillan's RfA

Thank you for fixing the AlisterMcMillan RfA. It was deleted. He really would be a great admin. Someone reputable should nom him.

I didn't fix it, just put a note on the troll's talk page reminding him to notify people he nominates for adminship. — Trilobite 17:22, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject European Union

Hey, I noticed you've done a lot of work to the MEP articles so I thought you might be interested in the WikiProject I've just created, to co-ordinate all things EU-related: WikiProject European Union, thanks - 23:10, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Good idea! I've signed up. — Trilobite 00:46, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Starfleet ranks and insignia 2

Heyas, I replied to your comment on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Starfleet ranks and insignia and wanted to alert you of it. If you'd review it, I'd appreciate it muchly. Happy editing, -SocratesJedi | Talk 23:35, 30 May 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Done. — Trilobite 00:46, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From the same page: You commented that Wikipedia should try to feature articles based on serious topics. I was wondering what do you consider to be a serious topic? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 00:46, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on the nomination page. — Trilobite 01:24, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Editing templates

Hi Trilobite, I couldn't find how to modify that upper-right table with the referendum overview for the proposed EU constitution... could you point me how to do it? (or add the turnouts yourself if you wish?) Thanks again! --jbc 23:20, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Replied on talk page. — Trilobite 23:41, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Thanks much, I didn't know about templates indeed! --jbc 00:06, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Robert McCartney article

Hi. I was just wondering if you are going to update the McCartney article, as it has not been updated since the family were in the USA? Fergananim

Hi, it's probably not a good idea to leave messages in my talk page archives; I only just found that one! I may update it some time, but there is a fair bit of work to be done and I am on a partial wikibreak at the moment. You could have a go yourself, of course. I should think just about all the news reports you'd need are available on the web. I'll have a look at it myself eventually and see what needs doing. Sorry not to be of more assistance. I've been meaning to get round to sorting it out for a while now (always the way on Wikipedia). Cheers. — Trilobite 03:02, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Kelly Martin's RfA

Thank you for supporting my candidacy for administrator. Kelly Martin 14:43, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

W. Mark Felt FAC

Salve!
I went and nominated W. Mark Felt as a WP:FAC. As you commented on it on the talk page, I'd appreciate your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/W. Mark Felt/archive1. PedanticallySpeaking 14:54, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I remember trying to keep the article in something like a reasonable condition on the day the news broke and edits were coming in thick and fast. I am no Watergate expert and so probably not qualified to make a call on the nomination, but I'll keep an eye on it and comment if I feel something needs mentioning. — Trilobite 23:08, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ubuntu article

Thanks for running to the rescue at Ubuntu. I've always been removing those extlinks on sight, but I never came up with the idea of adding a hidden comment for those illiterate Ubuntu Linux fans. In fact, I was having fun inventing new 'baffled and thunderstruck' edit summaries from time to time :P . Kind regards, — mark ✎ 19:27, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks and sorry to spoil your fun with the edit summaries! I wonder if someone will now fail to notice the comments and add Linux in again. Judging by some of the comments that regularly appear on Talk:Main Page despite the huge notice at the top telling everyone it's not a general contact point it would not surprise me greatly. — Trilobite 20:12, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Questions from Wiki alf

Trilobite: thanks for the advice, when I have anything worth archiving (like you) I will do that, isn't all in history anyway? Alf 14:22, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

My replies are on my talk. Alf 15:31, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, I saw them. — Trilobite 15:34, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Trilobite: I would like to prove I have ox.chem.ac.uk's permission for an article, who would I forward their email to for this purpose? Alf 20:40, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You would probably need to paste the email in question on the talk page of the article. By the way, it's important to note that permission to reproduce copyrighted material on this website is not good enough, as Wikipedia is free content that anyone can reproduce and modify as they wish. I assume you got them to release it under the GFDL, in which case everything is fine from a legal angle. Often it's not a good idea to add content to Wikipedia that was not written specifically for us, as it may need extensive work before it reads like a proper Wikipedia article. I don't know about your individual circumstances, however. If you're trying to clear up a dispute surrounding an article that was flagged as a copyvio then putting the relevant permission on the talk page should clear things up. Hope this helps. — Trilobite 20:54, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
OK already pasted the email into relevant page (glad I got something right) didn't specifically ask for GFDL but as it is virtually only the books references and research topic bullets would this be a big issue, as I'm pretty sure that was already in public domain? Maybe you'd take a look at their site and then the article and feedback any concerns. I would be surprised if his entry survives however so might not matter anyway. ox.chem website is [10] and the article is David Hodgson (chemist)/Temp.Alf 21:04, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
With such a short entry consisting mainly of things like book references, copying it without permission would probably not cause a huge problem, but we need permission nonetheless. Unless it's several decades old, everything published that doesn't consist of simple facts (like a list of cities the Olympics has been held in, or something), and that hasn't been explicitly released into the public domain by its copyright holder should be considered to be protected by copyright law and not inserted into Wikipedia. Some people wrongly assume that a website without a copyright notice is public domain, but anyway, since the one you linked to explicitly claims copyright for the University of Oxford at the bottom we definitely couldn't have used it without permission. It's not as if these things are ever likely to end in a court case or something, it's just that to avoid any question of copyright violation Wikipedia has to take a tough line on such matters. I try to avoid getting into these copyright disputes so I'll leave it for people who know more than me about these things to sort it out. I should think you've cleared it up by putting the note on the talk page. Cheers. — Trilobite 21:22, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I am indebted, many thanks. Alf 23:29, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

UK COTW: Transport in the United Kingdom

Hey, just to let you know, an article you supported, Transport in the United Kingdom, is this week's collaboration. Cheers! -- Joolz 19:22, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar

Wow, thanks! Indeed, a lot of the work I do doesn't get much attention, which for the most part is fine but sometimes frustrating. This'll spur me for a while! - Fredrik | talk 29 June 2005 18:55 (UTC)

Self-references

You reverted my edit, and I am not sure why. What I added was factual, true and of interest to the Wikipeia community. If you can justify your delete, that is fine. Link below is for before/after of edit.

http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Approval_voting&diff=17838460&oldid=15900319 Batmanand 30 June 2005 11:25 (UTC)

I'd be happy to explain my revert. Self-referencing is bad mainly because it makes the project look amateurish. The Wikimedia Foundation's board election is a very minor event as far as the rest of the world is concerned, and a good explanatory article about approval voting would have no need to mention it, especially in the introduction. This means that the only reason we mention it is that we're Wikipedia, and we tend to get a bit preoccupied with what goes on in our own community. Imagine you wanted to know about double glazing, so you looked it up in the Encyclopædia Britannica. There might be extensive coverage of the history and development of double glazing, along with explanations of the various types, etc, all of interest to someone wanting a good overview of the subject. It would be a bit surprising having read that to come across a note saying something like: "the Britannica offices had new double glazing installed last year." This topic might well be of interest to the people who work at Britannica, just as the way we conduct our board elections is of interest to the Wikipedia community. Neither fact, however, is of much interest to more than the few people directly affected, and articles are written for a general audience, not for the benefit of the Wikipedia community. It's policy here to avoid self-references, for these reasons and others you can find on that page. We try to avoid mentioning Wikipedia in articles except where we are explicitly writing about the subject, such as in the article on Wikipedia. If it seems like there's some need to mention Wikipedia in an article, it's a good idea to imagine you're reading the exact same thing in another encyclopedia. If it seems odd that another encyclopedia would mention Wikipedia in that context, it probably doesn't belong here either. Hope this helps. — Trilobite 30 June 2005 14:41 (UTC)
Whilst I do not entirely agree with your or the policy's reasoning, I am not going to revert, get cross or be generally juvenile. Firstly, you speed in response is most appreciated. Secondly, you are much more senior and experienced than I am, so to some extent I defer to your better judgment! Lastly, life is too short for argument. Thanks again! Batmanand 30 June 2005 21:52 (UTC)
Well, everyone is encouraged to be bold, so if you'd like to put forward a proposal to change the policy you'd be very welcome to do so, although I suspect it would meet with some resistance. Thanks and happy editing! — Trilobite 1 July 2005 02:30 (UTC)

I need a hand from someone with sysops, as I'd like my Image:Museum of the History of Science.jpg deleted, it's way too small to use and I intend to take a picture of the building myself. I'd also like to verify that the pd-art tag I've put on Image:Old Ashmolean.gif is OK: I emailed the director quoting the URLs of the Wiki pages on the licences and he said to take 'anything I liked, so long as the Museum is acknowledged', should I paste the email in somewhere?Alf 30 June 2005 16:03 (UTC)

I've deleted the image for you. As for Image:Old Ashmolean.gif, the tag you've put on should be fine. As it's old enough to be in the public domain there's probably no need to paste the email anywhere, but it was probably a good idea that you noted on the image description page that the museum was happy for you to reproduce it. Sometimes they attempt to claim copyright on these things so it's as well to have confirmation. Thanks. — Trilobite 1 July 2005 02:30 (UTC)
Many thanks for your time and thoughts. Alf 1 July 2005 16:46 (UTC)

Starfleet ranks and insignia 3

The article has been improved drasticaly, I think this is a good enough reason to reopen the FA status of this article. To be fair I am notifying all parties involved with the article on old candidacy. If I forgot one of you, its not intentional. Thats all for now --Cool Cat My Talk 1 July 2005 00:15 (UTC)

The saga continues.... Thanks for the note, though I'm inclined to stay out of it this time. — Trilobite 1 July 2005 02:30 (UTC)

Unicode titles

I noticed you moved Nipponzan-Myohoji to Nipponzan-Myohoji and deleted the "Title lacks diacritics" template reference. Which is good. Only I didn't know it was possible. Is it ok to use Unicode in article titles now? --Concrete Cowboy 1 July 2005 11:54 (UTC)

btw, surely it would have been polite to leave Nipponzan-Myohoji extant as a REDIRECT to Nipponzan-Myohoji? Did you have a reason not to do that? --Concrete Cowboy 1 July 2005 11:54 (UTC)
I moved Nipponzan Myohoji to Nipponzan-Myōhōji, which was the proper title according to the boilerplate text at the top of the article, and I did leave the old location as a redirect. Yes, it is possible to have Unicode titles (at last!) now we have upgraded to MediaWiki 1.5. It's a good idea to put redirects in though, so that people can find the articles without having to figure out how to enter various characters not available on their keyboards. — Trilobite 1 July 2005 12:02 (UTC)
That's good news. I didn't see any announcement. Also, I see the answer to my redirect question - the original never had a hyphen. --Concrete Cowboy 2 July 2005 14:47 (UTC)

EU wikiproject

Hi there! I am new to wikipedia and would like to contribute to the E.U. section. I've already contributed an article on the Open Method of Coordination. Comments would be welcome (no one has bother so far - don't know if that is a good sign or not). Also, the article does not appear if I type open method in the search box - is that normal? Generally I could contribute something on EU research policy and information technology. Hope to hear from you (would prefer reply on my talk page) --Daniel Spichtinger 6 July 2005 15:20 (UTC)

Replied on User talk:Danielsp. — Trilobite 6 July 2005 15:40 (UTC)

Counties

Hello Trilobite. Thanks for alerting me to the debate about counties. I'll go and have a look and probably contribute some ideas. Arcturus 6 July 2005 19:57 (UTC)

Page duplication

I would suggest you just revert and let the original editors re-add their own contributions. But in any event, it's good to unprotect as quick as possible, I think... Evercat 7 July 2005 21:39 (UTC)

It was hardly protected for long, and all the edits were merged. This is the best thing to do in the circumstances. — Trilobite 7 July 2005 21:42 (UTC)

"Weasel-worded platitudes"

Re: your removal of the edit to the 7 July 2005 London bombings.

I don't quite see why you said that - I was attempting to write NPOV, and I have nothing to do with the website in question, I just thought it showed a decent chronology.

The point I was trying to make, I think, is valid. Many media articles *have* commented on the less than strident public reaction, and the analyses have pointed towards people being 'used to' bombings due to the IRA campaigns. If you can find a better chronology of bombing incidents in the UK since 1970 (or similar date), then feel free to use it. Many people do not realise just how many there have been, just as Spain has has many caused by Basque separatists, France by Algerians, and Germany by the Red Army Faction and so on. I really don't have an axe to grind.

OK, sorry about that. A large number of people have arrived at this article and made edits to it where it's clear that they certainly do have an axe to grind, whether it's a political point or persistent and shameless promotion of their website (a lot of traffic is coming through that article at the moment). I agree that something needs to be said about the way the media have praised Londoners' resilience and how this is linked to the experience of IRA bombings. The problem was phrasing like "commentators attributed this" without these commentators being quoted or named or linked to. I will try to work something back in about this, it's certainly a valid point. Sorry to revert you wholesale like that, I failed to assume good faith there. — Trilobite 8 July 2005 17:30 (UTC)
No problem - you're doing a trying job in difficult circumstances - I've seen some of the mindles vandalism on the page (sigh).
As for links, try the following:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/07/international/08scenecnd.html?hp&ex=1120795200&en=a24366ff71437c33&ei=5094&partner=homepage (pre-penultimat & penultimate para)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/07/AR2005070701904.html (2nd & 3rd para)
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L08679259.htm
http://www.nysun.com/article/16666 (4th para)
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05189/534697.stm
I've deliberately gone for non-UK sources to avoid the possible accusation of bias of 'the Brits talking themselves up' type, otherwise I'd have included a link to 'The Economist' leader - second half of the third last para.
..and this one is non-American http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050708.wsayy0708/BNStory/Front/ relating Canadians experience of Londer's reactions.
Thanks for adding it back in.
No problem, thanks for your help. — Trilobite 8 July 2005 18:21 (UTC)
The more I think about it, the more I feel guilty about my edit summary when I reverted you [11]. It was uncalled for and probably qualifies as a personal attack, for which I sincerely apologise. — Trilobite 8 July 2005 23:07 (UTC)

7 July bombings page edit conflicts

Hi

Just seen your note. I didn't mean to disrespect other editors (including yourself). It's just that it's difficult editing a popular page, and though I did go to see what had changed, there was also the point that if I sought to change other things again, the article would have moved on yet again in the meantime. It's also always going to be the case that different editors have different views on certain changes in the article, and on fast-moving articles it isn't practical to discuss what seem like smaller points on the talk pages. Kind regards, jguk 8 July 2005 18:28 (UTC)

All very true but every time I've made an edit to that page I've been careful to reincorporate everything possible. I even went through the whole lot again after you made a mess of it to incorporate my edits and those of other people which you overwrote, instead of just reverting you, which was very tempting. — Trilobite 8 July 2005 19:23 (UTC)

Reference desk

Thanks for your answer at WP:RD about country music in Britain. I am grateful. PedanticallySpeaking July 8, 2005 20:54 (UTC)

Uncle G's RfA

Hi - I thought you'd like to know Uncle G has accepted his nomination on WP:RFA and has explained the delay in accepting. -- Rick Block (talk) July 9, 2005 17:18 (UTC)

I've been keeping an eye on it and I'm afraid I don't see it that way at all. I'm staying neutral. — Trilobite 9 July 2005 17:21 (UTC)

London bombings relief fund

Hi Trilobite. Just wanted to let you know that I have added a comment regarding the relief fund on the London Bombing discussion page. Cheers TigerShark 9 July 2005 17:20 (UTC)

Thanks, I've seen it. I'll leave it for others to decide I think. — Trilobite 9 July 2005 17:21 (UTC)

Lists of Wikipedians VfD

A page that you joined to help with associate with other members of the Wikipedia community is on VfD. Please see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Wikipedian citizens of the world, and the related page Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Wikipedian supporters of the sovereign nation-state. Cognition 10:17, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

These lists are silly but don't do much harm. Just to annoy people I'm going to vote to keep the one I'm on and delete the other. — Trilobite 14:07, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fonzie Fan

From what I read at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment#Choice_of_username, Fonzie Fan has been blocked, along with some of his socks. I know you asked for this block to come, and it looks like it has. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 20:26, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, good. He is a troll if ever there was one, but of the kind that like to hide under the radar. — Trilobite 20:30, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I know many people say the Sandbox will be targets of that kind of stuff, but we should begin to take a heavy look of the Sandbox enforcement. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 20:31, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I do sympathise with the view that it's harmless if these people just confine themselves to the sandbox, but it is like a zoo over there, and appears to have developed a weird subculture all of its own. None of these people do anything positive for Wikipedia, and then when one of them asks for adminship and turns out to have a thousand edits to the sandbox and not a single one to articles, I can't help but think things are a little out of hand. — Trilobite 20:39, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

New VfD for Comunleng

Trilobite - I simply think it would be better form to wait longer. Look at the circus VfD for GNAAAAA turned out to be. I would vote Delete then, I'd even get a couple of linguist mates to chip in with referances.
brenneman(t)(c) 07:38, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well the GNAA article has gone up six times now I believe. All I was doing is renominating an article that had left me quite bewildered the first time around. I can't agree with your comments on the VfD about renominating within four months weakening respect for process. I can't respect such farcical process as that last VfD, and this current one where nobody is prepared to answer simple questions that would settle the matter in a moment. Oh well, I'll wait and see what other people who come across it say. — Trilobite 07:47, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage vandalism

thanks for reverting my userpage, I guess I could consider it a good thing that I'm making a big enough difference to be noticed by the vandals. Jtkiefer 06:44, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Comunleng VFDs

Regarding one of your comments, user:BRG was one of the keep votes on the original VFD, of which I'm now something of a reluctant expert. Reason given in the first vote was "I think it's a useful article, even if the language is not very widely known."

This whole thing's actually making me nostalgic about the Human Thermodynamics 2 VFD, and I hate snake-oil peddlers. The Literate Engineer 00:11, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Balfour.jpg

Hello. I noticed in the history for this image that you tagged it {{PD}}. Do you have any more information on this picture and specifically why it is in the public domain? The reason I'm asking is that I've uploaded it onto Wikimedia Commons, and I may have to be more specific about the license. I don't want it to be erased from Commons and I would be grateful for any further information that you might have. /Nicke L 21:11, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on commons:User talk:Nicke L. — Trilobite 19:40, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Inkerman

Hi, please take a look at the Inkerman, Durham article. I am beginning to suspect that there are/were more than one Inkermans in England, in addition to the very original Inkerman. Also, you may want to clarify the fate of Balaclava, County Durham, similarly named after the Battle of Balaclava. mikka (t) 22:12, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So, are there other Inkermans in England or not? mikka (t) 20:47, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
None that I could find. There are various Inkerman Roads, Inkerman Terraces etc, but these are just street names. There seems to be only one village. I haven't managed to find this place called Balaclava either, though it wouldn't surprise me if it existed. — Trilobite 20:51, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jean Charles de Menezes

Hey Trilobyte, I was extremely surprised to see you revert my edits to this article. Do you truly believe my two intro pars are inferior to those I amended? Cheers Moriori 09:54, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

It was a case of an edit conflict, and you'll see from the history that I've tried to merge some of your edits, including to the intro. I was extremely surprised to see that you used rollback on me, which you should not have done. — Trilobite 09:57, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, the intro after I had sorted out the edit conflict was almost identical to yours, which should have suggested to you that I was acknowledging your improvements. There was no need to do a wholesale revert of my other changes. — Trilobite 10:01, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't think I had. I thought you had added a new section, which I kept.. Regarding Rollback, sorry, I thought that was how I was supposed to do it. No probs. I now know. Regarding mishmash, I wasn't onmly talking about the two intro pars. Some of the body copy I amendfed was verbose, repetitious and plain awful writing. Your rv took ourt my edits and replaced it with some verbose, repetitious and plain awful writing Moriori 10:09, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
Again, you'll see that I had already tried to incorporate some of your changes to the body copy. From the diffs [12] it certainly appears that you were making wholesale reverts. Since it appeared you were making no effort to incorporate edit conflicts, I responded in kind, and was then good enough to try to merge some of your changes afterwards, which as I have said, I think were beneficial. Regarding rollback, if you thought it was there for you to use in content disputes, you really should not be an admin. — Trilobite 10:17, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That's a curious comment. You assume I thought I was in a content dispute. Dispute no, but someone playing silly buggers, yes, erroneously. Incidentally, perhaps it appears I was making wholesale reverts. Please be assured that the edits of 22:44, 22:45, 22:45 and 22:46 were actually one edit. I have no idea how it shows up as four edits in the edit history. Cheers Moriori 10:33, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

Bible verses

SimonP (the creator of the 100 or so gospel verse articles) has tried to claim that the votes for the "only notable verses" section would include most of the 30,000 verses of the bible because he sees them as notable. To avoid such a POV twisting of the votes, I have added a new section - [13] - for voting on whether the number of notable verses is more like 30,000, or more like 30. Would you care to vote there as well? ~~~~ 00:29, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your Tools!

I just copied many of your Tools into my User:JesseW/monobook.js file. Thanks! I also wrote one of my own, a Changes-Since-You-Last-Edited tool. It puts a "since" tab on pages, which, when clicked, brings you to the history page, parses that page to find your most recent edit, and then shows you the diff between it and the current version. I find it useful to when reviewing my Contributions list. You're welcome to add it to your Tools page, if you find it useful. Thanks again! JesseW 09:24, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. I've tried that one out and it works great. I'd thought before that something like that would be useful but it was beyond my abilities. Thanks! — Trilobite 13:29, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm delighted that you like it! I see that you're using it now, which makes me very happy. I think I'll list it on Wikipedia:Tools, and maybe more people will find it useful... JesseW 00:11, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Independent Police Complaints Commission

Sems you're right - they've changed their name. Sorry, evidently one of my blonde moments. Poetlister 21:15, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Andrea Dworkin talk page

That Andrea Dworkin is dead is hardly news anymore. Is there anything on the discussion page that can be retired? If not now, can we come to an agreement about when? From my point of view, love her or hate her or whatever, it is called "moving on". Personally, I would rather see some current discussion about how to improve the page from its current state, and I have not even read one of Dworkin's books.

Fair enough, I've put the old comments in an archive page, which is what's usually done when discussion pages get too long. I restored your deletions because you can't just go removing people's comments wholesale. Hope this is acceptable. — Trilobite 15:30, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Accents in category ordering

Hi, I saw you added accents into the categories on the page about László Kovács, like [[Category:1939 births|Kovács, László]]. I think this is impractical, because letters with diacritics are treated by the Wikipedia software as letters following "z" in the alphabet (based on their character code), so words with the letter "á" will be put to the wrong place in the alphabet. "Kovács" should be arranged as it it were "Kovacs", or right after it. To reach correct alphabetical ordering, we must insert names after pipes without any accents or diacritics. Thank you for your attention in the future. -- Adam78 17:34, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for letting me know. I've never been too sure whether to include accents in category sorts or not, and did that one without really thinking about it. I'll remember in future. — Trilobite 17:52, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Geo-stub split

Just wanted to say thanks for your help on the Durham-geo-stub split. So... thanks! :) Grutness...wha? 23:48, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I thought I ought to lend a hand wtih that. — Trilobite 12:35, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fahd disambig page

Hiya

I noticed your changes to the Fahd disambiguation page. Excuse my ignorance, but I have a question.

As far as I know, the first two persons cited are commonly known just by the name Fahd, whereas for the rest, it is their first name and they are presumably known by their entire name or surname. Should the first two be separated from the rest, on the grounds that if someone has gone looking for "Fahd" they were probably looking for one of them? Palmiro 17:52, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I really wasn't sure how to do it, so I thought putting those two at the top would make it easier for people for the reasons you mention. I find transliterations of Arabic names in Wikipedia and everywhere else to be really inconsistent, and if someone was looking for the other people on the list there's a very good chance they'd use a different spelling than what we have as their article titles, so I thought it would be best to list them all on a general Fahd page. I'm sure you're right that the first two will be the ones most people are looking for, so if you think it would be helpful to seperate them somehow please go ahead. — Trilobite 18:02, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

List of places in Northumberland

Thanks for making a start on these, and creating the stubs. Where are you getting the place name lists from? (assume its not from memory). If they're available online, let me know where and I'll start from the bottom and work up ... AndrewMcQ 19:10, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew. My main source for the lists is the ABC's Gazetteer of British Place Names (with the addition of the occasional place they've missed that I notice when cross-checking with an atlas). This is a good starting point and has the helpful feature of providing a grid reference, but it's often necessary to do a bit more work either to disambiguate from places elsewhere with the same name, or to work out whether somewhere really qualifies as a village or not. I get hold of the list by searching for "Northumberland" on whichever letter I'm focussing on, then if I can't find them on my printed atlas I check them against the OS maps on Multimap (sometimes zooming in on the aerial photo to see if a placename refers to a real hamlet or just a couple of farms), and use the atlas to do the sentences about where they are in relation to other towns and villages. I've got into a bit of a routine with it and I fine-tuned the procedure after filling out the list of places in County Durham a few months ago. If you're interested in working from the bottom up that would be great. Meet you in the middle maybe! — Trilobite 20:09, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, why did you unprotect the RFC page?

It failed and should no longer be used. Could you elucidate? Kim Bruning 22:35, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't appreciate the attempt to get rid of a page which there was a significant community interest in keeping. When it was undeleted you protected it in order to prevent further discussion. It think it's a little odd that strict interpretations of the rules regarding RfCs are being used to stifle debate about an incident where an administrator decided it would be okay to throw the rules out the window all together. It's no wonder people go on about a cabal of administrators who ignore valid complaints about abuse of power when you use your power to protect a page so that no one can express their agreement with criticism of Ed Poor's actions. — Trilobite 22:48, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
There are better locations to discuss Ed Poors actions than that particular RFC, see the VFU. There's no point in blaming Ed Poor for what is basically a serious flaw in wikipedia in the first place. He was just trying to fix it. The RFC simply failed certification, and that should have been the end of that. Kim Bruning 23:07, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy to see it discussed elsewhere, but a valuable conversation was taking place at that page. It needn't have been initiated as an RfC in the first place, but just because it was that didn't make it appropriate to invoke a technicality to curtail valuable discussion. — Trilobite 23:15, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

UK placename disambiguation

I've been moving some articles around, for example, from Cottingham, Yorkshire to Cottingham, East Riding of Yorkshire. I felt that any ambiguous place names should be disabiguated by having their county proceed the placename itself, rather than just the area like Yorkshire, as with the majority of articles. I only started doing some of this today and noticed that you made Oakenshaw, West Yorkshire redirect to Oakenshaw, Yorkshire. Do you mind if I change this round and carry on with the task? It's just that you've been doing a lot of placename work yourself and I wouldn't want to tread on the toes of such a established wikipedian. - Hahnchen 01:55, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the trouble with this is that it's all bound up with the old argument about what is meant by a county. I don't see that Cottingham, Yorkshire is at all ambiguous unless there are other Cottinghams in Yorkshire, which appears not to be the case. I don't know about you, but the present arrangements of Yorkshire's administrative structure seem like a bit of a farce to me, with North Yorkshire existing as an administrative county, West Yorkshire and South Yorkshire being comprised of unitary authorities and having no county councils themselves, and then the anomaly of the East Riding of Yorkshire, which has been resurrected as a unitary authority, while the other ridings have not. I've tried to avoid Yorkshire placenames where possible for this very reason. I thought the best compromise was to say a place was in Yorkshire and not specify beyond that unless there were other places of the same name in other parts of Yorkshire. This seemed like a common sense implementation of the disambiguation policy, which discourages specifying more than is necessary. Changing Oakenshaw, Yorkshire to Oakenshaw, West Yorkshire seems to introduce redundancy, and since it has no county council it's difficult to argue that West Yorkshire is any more valid than the traditional West Riding of Yorkshire. Both were explicitly not abolished, but neither has had a county council for many years (19 and 31 years respectively, I think). You may well be in the right according to the policy on this (depending on how you interpret it), but then the policy is a mess and no one appears to follow it anyway. I'm not sure what to suggest. — Trilobite 18:57, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Changing Oakenshaw, Yorkshire to Oakenshaw, West Yorkshire would introduce redundancy, but I felt that given most other placenames are directly proceeded by county name, Oakenshaw, West Yorkshire would be more intuitive. Cottingham, Yorkshire is not ambiguous, there are no other Cottinghams in Yorkshire. However, if you were to send a letter there, you would either use East Riding of Yorkshire or (less likely) East Yorkshire. I feel that although redundancy has been added into the system, it would be more natural and consistent. - Hahnchen 23:59, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Func's RfA :)

Trilobite, thank you for your support on my RfA! I consider you to be a fine Wikipedian as well. :)

Please never hesitate to let me know if you have concerns with any administrative action I may make.

Func( t, c, e,  ) 19:04, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Northumberland-geo-stub

Hi Trilobite - owing to a surprising rise in the number of stub articles about Northumberland geography (can't think who'd be responsible for them...;), there is now a separate Northumberland-geo-stub to go with the various other high-stubcount county stubs. Feel free to use it for any new articles on the land of my s.o.'s Hedley and Fenwick ancestry you write! Grutness...wha? 13:23, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Need help with making a template

Hi, you seem like an expert, so I was wondering if you could help with my proto-user box for Babel for users who can speak "Townie" or Massachusetts English (eg. "Pahk Yah Cah In Hahvahd Yahd..."), here's what I have so far, but I was was wondering how to make it so I could get something that people can type in brackets to get my box in there like {{user en}} or {{vfd}} . Template talk was no help, I was wondering if you could give some advice. Karmafist 18:08, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you've got it sorted now. If you need help with anything else feel free to ask. — Trilobite 10:44, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Years Template

Hey there, howzit goin'. I have a question (more like a request) regarding your comment on the survey about the infobox. Although I like the form on 2001 (on my home computer) I can see (at work computers) that it is indeed far too wide. Is there a way to code it to be limited to a percentage of the screen (say 40%) or is this more work than its worth? Thanks.- Trevor macinnis 03:57, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best way would be to break the lines somehow, like in the news by month section. On 2001 the widest line is the arts one. If you put a <br /> in the middle somewhere the box's width will be reduced by 100 pixels or so. I think breaking the lines is a better way of doing it than specifying a percentage because it will lead to odd line wrapping as people resize their windows. — Trilobite 10:44, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Politics of Norway template

Image:Coat_of_Arms_of_Norway.png Hi, the Norwegian coat of arms is now available in a higher-resolution PNG with transparency. Do you think it can make it in the template? I'm not sure myself. --Orzetto 13:19, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. I only removed it before because it didn't look too good with the white background sitting on the light grey. Coats of arms seem to be preferred over flags in these kinds of infoboxes, which I think is probably reasonable. I've made the change and the transparent version looks quite good I think. — Trilobite 14:04, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Counties, etc.: A suggestion for consensus

I've posted a suggestion that should help resolve this dispute at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (places)#Suggestion for consensus. Please have a look. Thanks, 80.255 18:48, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm watching from the sidelines for now but I think we may be getting somewhere at long last. — Trilobite 14:27, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Perth

Vclaw has stated that you moved Perth, Western Australia to Perth a few days ago without any discussion, and Derek Ross has now reverted this move. I have added this move to Wikipedia:Requested moves and discussion is taking place at Talk:Perth (disambiguation), if you wish to join the discussion there to discuss the reasons you made the move. -- Curps 04:12, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know about the controversy. I've added some comments. — Trilobite 14:27, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wiktionary template

Hi - I don't suppose you know when the template is due be updated? That place is like a graveyard and I have no clue who to talk to to get an answer. Thanks. 211.202.17.124 01:04, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Which template is this please? I'm a little confused. — Trilobite 12:28, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ubuntu page

Hi - the Ubuntux Website you removed needs a login, because everbody can contribute to the content. It is even possible to do a Ubuntu-related blog there. I think the website is worth to be mentioned, although it is relatively new. I checked the site again and now there is the possibility to view the content without login, that's even better :)

The only content I could see was a how-to about the Firefox logo, and a blog post saying "Ubuntu rulez". If there's any more content, it's not very easy to find. Is this your site by any chance? — Trilobite 12:28, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Self-reference

Hi,

I note that when deleting a claim that I am Jim Duffy you referred to it as a self-reference. One now banned user who wikistalked me insists that I am that person and added in that claim. I deleted it but just so you know it was added in as part of a campaign of wikistalking by an individual still on Wikipedia using sockpuppets. They are the one responsible for it, not me, so calling it a self-reference is misleading. (They came on, opened a user page, put that one line on, and then disappeared again!) FearÉIREANN\(caint) 19:48, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I called it a self-reference in the sense that is used on Wikipedia:Avoid self-references. In other words, I wasn't implying that you had added it, indeed I saw that you'd just removed it and that the user you mentioned had added it back in again, so I was reverting back to your version. I tend to think mentions of Wikipedia within Wikipedia articles are rarely appropriate, so a sentence in an article on someone that said they were an editor at Wikipedia I would tend to remove as a matter of course. I hope this clears up the misunderstanding over my use of the term "self-reference", which wasn't intended to suggest you were responsible for it. Keep up the good work by the way, you're one of the best contributors on here in my opinion. In fact I've probably learnt quite a lot about Irish history and politics and all sorts of other stuff by reading your articles! — Trilobite 20:09, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Javascript tools

I'm looking through your tools. The morelinks() function looks like it does something different than the one listed on m:User Styles/bottom tabs for bottom tabs. Are these going to conflict? — Omegatron 14:50, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

It does look that way but I'm hopeless when it comes to javascript. If it causes you a problem it should be easy enough to change all references to one of them to some other name, which will probably sort it. — Trilobite 07:08, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I can do that. I just wasn't sure if yours was a newer modification of the same idea, so I should use yours in place of theirs. — Omegatron 13:14, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

Image source

I didn't find any information about source or autor of the image Image:LocationWales.PNG that was uploaded by you (so I put "No source" template into its description page). Fill required information, please. Thanks. --RuM 19:53, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm I'm not sure quite what the situation is there or why I forgot to tag them. Someone has tagged them PD I can't work out if they're GFDL or PD. That image was a modification of a similar one, which I can't seem to track down. — Trilobite 07:06, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/European Union member states at the 2004 Summer Olympics

You might be interested to have a look. Regards --Pgreenfinch 12:57, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. — Trilobite 14:40, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Culture of DRC

Hello. Culture of DRC has been brought to life again. Feel free to check and expand etc. I will be working on it - Xed 22:34, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's excellent news. I hoped it would reappear one day. I'll have a look at it when I have time. Cheers. — Trilobite 23:20, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for merging in my suggestions on the charity talk page... Many admins I know, including the one I finance :), are so controversy adverse that they are unwilling to step in to take an administrative action that I've pointed out, even when their position overlaps with mine 100%. Thanks for having a spine!  :) --Gmaxwell 21:56, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! I had thought you were an admin actually and wasn't planning to go stepping into the controversy over that page, but then I thought it'd be interesting to see what would happen if I actually added all those to the list. Seems like no one's noticed so far! — Trilobite 22:01, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, no desire to be an admin either, I've seen what it's done to Mindspillage! :) This seems simmlar to the argument I had over the global warming text on Alleged causes of Hurricane Katrina, it was highly POV and inaccurate when I found it, so I just removed it because better info was already on Tropical Cyclone (where there is at least one climatologist who cares about the quality of the article). It was agressivly reinserted, and no one else wanted to touch the issue, so I decided to just fix it. After fixing it, it basically said the opposite of what it did when I started... but that version has stood unmolested: It turns out that they only wanted subject mentioned because they thought it would help the article survive VFD. I suspect it's the same sort of force here, along the lines of: we're tired of being called greedy, so here is a place you can spam links.. now shut-up. --Gmaxwell 22:14, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I see you pulled the Ayn Rand link... :) Yea, I primarly provided that one for discussion, I didn't expect anyone would actually insert it. --Gmaxwell 22:17, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I would have been slightly horrified if I'd come across and seen that someone else had inserted it, but I thought it would be a good test of whether anyone was actually paying attention to that page that was supposedly such an important component of the delicately worked-out compromise. — Trilobite 14:26, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RFAs

Hey Trilobite, thanks for your vote and comment on my recent RFA, your support was appreciated :D -- Joolz 11:36, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for voting for me in my RFA. I was really touched at how many people voted for me! --Angr/tɔk tə mi 22:49, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're both welcome! — Trilobite 14:26, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look to

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Robert_Schuman

31 Minutos

Just like to thank you for 31 Minutos. Nice article of a very fun show. Doidimais Brasil 03:24, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'd forgotten about that one. If I ever get the chance to see it I'll make sure I do. — Trilobite 04:00, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Request for moderator attention

Hello. Articles Derek Croxton and Anuschka Tischer are in AfD since September 9 but the AfD clearly failed. Articles are to be kept. I wonder if you´d be so kind as to remove them from AfD? Thanks. Doidimais Brasil 18:20, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've closed the AfDs. Cheers. — Trilobite 04:00, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nafaanra

Hi Trilobite,

I'm writing this message to you because you are one of the editors who supported Nafaanra language on its way to become a Featured Article. Back in February, quite a few of you asked for sound recordings. I am really excited to let you know that User:Alafo, who came across Wikipedia when googling for Nafaanra, the native language of his wife, has provided us with some fine recordings of the language. I have just added them to the article so that all of us can enjoy the sounds of Nafaanra from Ghana. Kind regards, — mark ✎ 10:50, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That is excellent news. I hope to have time to listen to the recordings soon. Thanks for letting me know! — Trilobite 22:33, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

grinbot question

Hello,

You left a message last time about grinbot here. As far as I know the issues should be fixed now (apart from the last link which was magic and very possibly not done by the bot but some edit collision of unknown kind), if you want please check whether everything seems okay now. (I check for the problems you've mentioned.) Please feed me back on my talk page. Thank you. --grin ✎ 21:52, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on talk page. — Trilobite 22:33, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User categorisation

You were listed on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Europe page as living in or being associated with Europe. As part of the Wikipedia:User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in Europe for instructions.--Rmky87 04:33, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

New European Union collaboration

Hi Trilobite, this is just a note telling you that I have created the European Union collaboration (the first collaboration is Eurobarometer). I'm looking forward to your contributions! Talrias (t | e | c) 12:11, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox extension

Would you happen to know how to make a firefox extension using Javascript? It would be very simple and used to fight vandalism. The basic idea is to feed RC diff's into firefox, and let it determine which pages contain text (such as an obscenity) listed in a file. For pages that don't contain anything on this list, the tab is closed. The others remain open and ready to be examined. If you can't figure out how to hookup the IRC RC output into firefox, then it could be used with WP:CDVF to open new tabs in firefox to be checked. I found a guide to making extensions, but it says you need to know Javascript. Thanks. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-10-30 03:49

Hi. I'm afraid that's a bit beyond me but I know there are plenty of people around, particularly on the IRC channel, who have done good work creating vandal detection bots and the like who may well be able to apply their skills to a firefox extension like the one you describe. Sorry I can't be of more assisstance! — Trilobite 15:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Llanfynydd name.jpg has been listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Llanfynydd name.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

World Citizen userbox, {{User:1ne/Userboxes/User world}}

Hi, I noticed the message saying you're a World Citizen, I would like to invite you to add {{User:1ne/Userboxes/User world}} to your user page if you wish to proclaim it in a more effective way, and this template will also add you automatically to the Wikipedians with World Citizenship category. :) --Mistress Selina Kyle 23:54, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IPA nonsense on La Llorona

No, YOU stop "degrading" this encyclopedia by forcing totally ridiculous pronounciation standards onto articles that do not need or what that nonsense. Your edit comments are obnoxioous, your actions moreso. Stop trying to push a pronounciation guide that you have to be a professional linguist to understand onto an article that already has a clear pronounciation listed, and stop your obnoxious edit comments too while you are at it. DreamGuy 00:06, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I can be bothered to argue this with you. Three people have now reverted your dumbing down of the article, and anyway it has long been established elsewhere that IPA is to be preferred to ad hoc pronunciation guides: these get replaced all the time in the normal course of editing people's contributions to conform to a decent standard. I had no idea my edit would be controversial. You have made a couple of false statements above. Firstly, it is ludicrous to suggest that you need to be a professional linguist to read IPA. I and thousands of others who are capable of understanding that example have no formal education in phonetics or linguistics whatsoever. Those who can't read it and are bothered about the pronunciation can consult the relevant Wikipedia articles. Secondly, the article did not already have a clear pronunciation guide. As I said in an edit summary, it is simply not possible to transcribe most words in other languages accurately using pseudo-English spellings, because the sounds of the languages do not correspond. That "lah yoh-roh-nah" gibberish could be pronounced in all sorts of ways, most of them quite unlike what you are trying to convey; it is certainly less helpful to an understanding of how to pronounce the word than the Spanish spelling on its own. Most readers won't particularly care about the pronunciation and will skip over it anyway, but for those who do want that bit of information, let's at least refrain from giving them a misleading pronunciation guide. IPA might be a little bit harder to understand, but it or something like it (e.g. SAMPA) is the only way to do things properly. You seem to be under the mistaken impression that it is possible to render the pronunciation accurately using your method, and that people are changing it to IPA out of some linguistic elitism. You are wrong on both counts. Ideally we'd have a sound sample, and if I had a microphone I'd record one myself, but in the absence of that IPA is the best way. — Trilobite 02:15, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Greetings Trilobite,
I wish to offer my gratitude for supporting me on my recent nomination for adminship, which passed with the final tally of 65/4/3. If you would ever desire my assistance in anything, or wish to give me feedback on any actions I take, feel free to let me know. Cheers! Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 09:53, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tools

I've been using your javascript tools for a while. Thanks a lot. A Wikiproject has been started for organizing all the various javascripts that exist and improving on each other's scripts. You could join.

  • Instead of loading functions with window.onload = Main;, we're using addOnloadHook(), which is built in to the main wiki .js
  • The addlilink() function you're using has been improved a bit, called addLink()
  • There's a self-contained regex replace tab here. It just needs addLink()
  • I improved on the unverified image tagger a little here. It presses save automatically and doesn't add the tag if it's already there. — Omegatron 09:22, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, thanks a lot for working on the code! — Trilobite 21:20, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles For Deletion

Hi, a while ago you made some comments about the presence of bible-verse articles, and/or source texts of the bible, and you may therefore be interested in related new discussions:

--Victim of signature fascism | Don't forget to vote in the Wikipedia Arbitration Committee elections 18:17, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vladimír Špidla photo

Hi Trilobite, could you please copy the lovely photo of Vladimír Špidla you uploaded to en-wiki also to the Czech version? Thanks :-) JanSuchy 22:10, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I've put it on Commons and added it to the Czech version of the article. — Trilobite 09:47, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is my username blocked???

Trilobite,

You probably don't remember me but you blocked my username approximately a year ago. I have been protesting this for the past year by not contributing to wikipedia. I've been logging in only to read articles. I never did get confirmation from you as to what part of wikipedia's username policy I had broken. I find it particularly strange because Wikimedia is a foundation that strongly supports freedom of speach. For instance, wikipedia published the controversial images of the profet Mahomad under the banner of freedom of speach. Even at the time you blocked my username the words you seem to have found so offensive were already being used in wikipedia articles in the same context (See Jebus). So please Trilobite, can you explain to me why it was that you felt the need to block my username User:Jebus Christ without offering anything more than a vague explanation and offering no form of discussion on the subject.

I'd like this resolved as I believe I have a lot to offer and I will not be contributing a single sentence under any other username.

Rgds,

Jimididit 21:18, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also would hope to see his username be returned. It might be offensive to some, however it is not banal language, and for him to refer to himself as that reflects on himself and nothing else. I think that this decision suffocates freedom of speech. --Licinius 11:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trilobite, I invite you to view the petition i've set up on my user page. Some well respected wikipedean's agree with my position. User talk:Jebus Christ Jimididit 12:48, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page. — Trilobite 01:48, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commons signatures , Category:European Constitution

Hi. You uploaded many signatures into commons:Category:European Constitution and tagged them public domain ({{PD}}). What is the claim of these images being public domain?

They are currently on commons deletion requests so this is essential...

Fred-Chess 14:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I've replied over at the Commons. — Trilobite 22:59, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TfD

You may be interested in Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_April_12#Template:Otheruses4, which was deleted last year, but has come back from the dead. ed g2s • talk 23:36, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Central Asia

Hi, I'm trying to start some sort of working group to improve the coverage of Central Asia and related topics in Wikipedia. Leave a message on my userpage if you're interested. Aelfthrytha 04:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

İlham Əliyev

I appreciate why you moved this article to "İlham Əliyev", but if you check Wikipedia policy - and practice in other biographies - the principle used in naming articles is to give the best (often most common) English trasliteration of a proper noun. Consider such names as: 上野 彦馬 (Ueno Hikoma), Казимир Малевич(Kazimir Malevich) or even Hồ Chí Minh (Ho Chi Minh). Although "İlham Əliyev" is appropriate and correct in an Azerbaijani context - most non-Azerbaijanis would have no idea how to pronounce this - and no way to enter it in a search field! The same goes for any other names that use non-roman characters. I believe the article should be moved back to "Ilham Aliyev", with "İlham Əliyev" in the opening sentence of the article, and with a "İlham Əliyev" redirect page. Does that make sense to you? Pinkville 16:31, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's all a question of where you draw the line. "İlham Əliyev" is written in an alphabet that does not differ greatly from that used to write the English language, so I don't see any need to transliterate the article title. "上野 彦馬" and "Казимир Малевич" are sufficiently exotic for most speakers of English that they need transliterating, but "Hồ Chí Minh" ought to be titled that way, in my opinion. The pronunciation argument is a red herring since you can't apply the rules of English orthography exactly to languages with a different phonemic inventory. Yes, readers will get it 'near enough' if they attempt to pronounce "Ilham Aliyev", but I don't see "İlham Əliyev" being much worse in this regard. The move you advocate is dumbing-down in my view, but oh well, I can't be bothered to argue the toss. Either way, as long as there are suitable redirects in place and common alternatives are mentioned in the article, it's not the end of the world. — Trilobite 07:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi, can you verify that you are the creator of Image:Netherlands map large.png? Thanks. —Khoikhoi 02:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not. It appears to have been there so long that automated conversion of the database has obscured the identity of the original uploader. I just edited the image description page, as I recall. — Trilobite 07:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An old AfD

You commented in the AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shopping encylopedia. I have started an AfD of a related article at wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shopperpedia. Your comments there would be appreciated. Graham talk 10:26, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Georgia Move

As a past participant in the discussion on how to handle the Georgia pages, I thought you might be interested to know that there's a new attempt to reach consensus on the matter being addressed at Talk:Georgia (country)#Requested_Move_-_July_2006. Please come by and share your thoughts to help form a consensus. --Vengeful Cynic 03:29, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, looks like I'm a bit late to participate in this discussion. — Trilobite 07:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Banned User

Thought I would post on here to alert you to a banned user that you have blocked before coming back and continuing. here is the contributions page with his edits restarting recently, as you can see others have been reverting his edits along with my attempts. Steve355 12:57, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tulse Hill

Do you know where Tulse Hill is ? Alec - U.K. 20:54, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's in South London, as you can discover at Tulse Hill. — Trilobite 07:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Translation request

Trilobite, My apologies for using this venue to approach you. I need an accurate translation of two paragraphs from a Miguel Delibes work. Would you be so kind as to help me? It is tangentially concerned with Wikipedia content - on hunting with Galgo's and Podenco's. Thank you, Richard Hawkins --Richard Hawkins 23:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC)repeat --Richard Hawkins 02:54, 21 May 2007 (UTC) repeat--Richard Hawkins 20:34, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late reply. I guess this no longer applies, and in any case, my Spanish is probably not up to it. — Trilobite 01:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Joaquín Almunia.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Joaquín Almunia.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. cohesion 01:15, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cease and desist

Please stop creating articles such as Daciana Sârbu if you cannot add the proper sort keys so that the articles are indexed properly in categories. I fixed that one. Go back and fix any others you have messed up the same way. Gene Nygaard 08:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed another at Tiberiu Bărbuleţiu. Gene Nygaard 18:16, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to bother to provide you with a proper response, because your tone is unnecessarily hostile. That you would prefer articles to be missing than not comply with your pet policy on the minor issue of category sorting without diacritics is laughable. Maybe if you calmed down a bit about all this other editors would take you more seriously. — Trilobite 23:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tynwald Day FARC

Hi,

Tynwald Day is up for FARC. Are you able to fix the referencing? Tony 07:32, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. If you want to contact someone in relation to that article the best people would be Lord Emsworth, who wrote it, or someone from the Isle of Man. I have made three minor edits to it ever, so I'm not sure why you're contacting me. — Trilobite 22:29, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Andris Piebalgs.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 01:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Franco Frattini.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 16:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Günter Verheugen.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:37, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:László Kovács.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:40, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Charlie McCreevy.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Margot Wallström.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Siim Kallas.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mariann Fischer Boel.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Neelie Kroes.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Peter Mandelson.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Louis Michel.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Viviane Reding.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Vladimír Špidla.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC) {{subst:replaceable|Stavros Dimas.jpg} Bob 06:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Marcos Kyprianou.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Janez Potocnik.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Olli Rehn.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Janez Potocnik.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Jacques Barrot.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Joe Borg.jpg

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Bob 06:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Translation request again =

Trilobite, My apologies for using this venue to approach you. I need an accurate translation of two paragraphs from a Miguel Delibes work. Would you be so kind as to help me? It is tangentially concerned with Wikipedia content - on hunting with Galgo's and Podenco's. Thank you, Richard Hawkins --Richard Hawkins 23:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See response to previous request above. Sorry I wasn't able to help. — Trilobite 01:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UK infobox templates

There is currently a debate about replacing the existing UK place infoboxes with a unified one. I generally support this proposal but there is an attempt to remove the historic county information that a lot of people worked on and where a consensus was reached. I would appreciate your input into this. Thanks. Owain (talk) 11:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, the discussion is at Template talk:Infobox GB place#Straw polls Owain (talk) 14:55, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like the battle was lost this time. Stupid fuckers. Maybe historic county information, which is entirely relevant and obviously needn't exclude information on modern administrative units, will be back one day. I hope so. — Trilobite 01:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:European Greens logo.png

Thanks for uploading Image:European Greens logo.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

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 fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 20:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:European Greens logo.png

Thanks for uploading Image:European Greens logo.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 20:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Durham flag.PNG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Durham flag.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 03:11, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Translation request yet again

Trilobite, My apologies for using this venue to approach you. I need an accurate translation of two paragraphs from a Miguel Delibes work. Would you be so kind as to help me? It is tangentially concerned with Wikipedia content - on hunting with Galgo's and Podenco's. Thank you, Richard Hawkins --Richard Hawkins 23:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC)repeat --Richard Hawkins 02:54, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As above. — Trilobite 01:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:European Greens logo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:European Greens logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:09, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Little context in East Kyo

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on East Kyo, by Brianga (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because East Kyo is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting East Kyo, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate East Kyo itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 02:33, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing wrong with village articles, even if they're stubs, as has long been established. Glad it was kept. — Trilobite 01:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Project European Union

Hello Trilobite/archive, you are member of the project European Union. I try to create a new project page for the project. You can see it at here Because this should be the project page for all it´s members, please tell me, what you think about it. Please leave your comments on the talkpage of the project.--Thw1309 11:01, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Modified monobook sidebar.PNG

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any 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.BetacommandBot 01:44, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Modified monobook sidebar.PNG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Modified monobook sidebar.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template cleanup

A few templates you created, Template:Babels2 and Template:Babels3, have been marked for deletion as deprecated and orphaned templates. If, after 14 days, there have been no objections, the templates will be deleted. If you wish to object to their deletion, please list your objections here and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the templates. If you feel the deletions are appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. --MZMcBride 04:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles

I've nominated Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles, a page you created, for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Guy (Help!) 20:02, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I created that to track potential conflicts of interest and for people's general interest. Seems reasonable that it was kept. — Trilobite 01:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Year page formatting of multiple events

Hello, I'm sending you this message since you were involved in the August 2005 survey on year pages. As I don't know if you've gathered, somebody has been fighting for a change to the house style on how to notate multiple events on the same date. A discussion is currently in progress - your contribution (including whether you still favour the style you voted for or have changed your mind) would be appreciated! -- Smjg (talk) 15:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Trilobite! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 109 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 35 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

  1. Miguel Delibes - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  2. Adams Oshiomhole - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  3. Andris Piebalgs - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  4. Ján Figeľ - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  5. Adolfo Canepa - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  6. Marianne Mikko - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  7. Gisela Kallenbach - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  8. Frithjof Schmidt - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  9. Elisabeth Schroedter - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  10. Helga Trüpel - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
More...

11. Friedrich-Wilhelm Graefe zu Baringdorf 12. Heide Rühle 13. Hélène Flautre 14. Marie-Hélène Aubert 15. Daniel Caspary 16. Lutz Goepel 17. Ingeborg Grässle 18. Karsten Friedrich Hoppenstedt 19. Georg Jarzembowski 20. Elisabeth Jeggle 21. Ewa Klamt 22. Dieter-Lebrecht Koch 23. Christoph Konrad 24. Werner Langen 25. Kurt Joachim Lauk 26. Kurt Lechner 27. Klaus-Heiner Lehne 28. Hartmut Nassauer 29. Doris Pack 30. Markus Pieper 31. Godelieve Quisthoudt-Rowohl 32. Horst Schnellhardt 33. Andreas Schwab 34. Renate Sommer 35. Rainer Wieland 36. Věra Flasarová 37. Jaromír Kohlíček 38. Jiří Maštálka 39. Miloslav Ransdorf 40. Daniel Strož 41. Giorgos Dimitrakopoulos 42. Manolis Mavrommatis 43. Georgios Papastamkos 44. Ioannis Varvitsiotis 45. Kostis Hatzidakis 46. Maria Matsouka 47. Evangelia Tzampazi 48. Panagiotis Beglitis 49. Aikaterini Batzeli 50. Stavros Arnaoutakis 51. Giorgos Toussas 52. Thanasis Pafilis 53. Diamanto Manolakou 54. Panayiotis Demetriou 55. Yiannakis Matsis 56. Alexandra Dobolyi 57. Zita Gurmai 58. Gábor Harangozó 59. Magda Kósáné Kovács 60. Csaba Tabajdi 61. Emilio Menéndez 62. Rosa Miguélez 63. Francisca Pleguezuelos 64. Javier Moreno 65. Jean Spautz 66. Riitta Myller 67. André Laignel 68. Stéphane Le Foll 69. Marie-Noëlle Lienemann 70. Béatrice Patrie 71. Francisco Assis 72. Luis Manuel Capoulas Santos 73. Manuel António dos Santos 74. Edite Estrela 75. Emanuel Jardim Fernandes 76. Elisa Ferreira 77. Ana Maria Gomes 78. Pedro Guerreiro 79. Carlos Coelho 80. Maria da Assunção Esteves 81. Duarte Freitas 82. Vasco Graça Moura 83. Sérgio Marques 84. Luís Queiró 85. José Ribeiro e Castro 86. José Albino Silva Peneda 87. Šarūnas Birutis 88. Ģirts Valdis Kristovskis 89. Inese Vaidere 90. Roberts Zīle 91. Georgs Andrejevs 92. Aldis Kušķis 93. Rihards Pīks 94. Marie-Hélène Descamps 95. Françoise Grossetête 96. Véronique Mathieu 97. Tokia Saïfi 98. Margie Sudre 99. Jean-Paul Gauzès 100. Maurice Hayes 101. Benedikt Sigurðsson Gröndal 102. Tursunbek Chyngyshev 103. Almanbet Matubraimov 104. Kubanychbek Jumaliyev 105. Chantal Simonot 106. Piret Järvis 107. Ivo Vajgl 108. Tiberiu Bărbuleţiu 109. Martin Dimitrov

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 05:25, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Vfd tab on deleted pages.PNG

Thank you for uploading File:Vfd tab on deleted pages.PNG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 11:22, 5 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:22, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Francisca Pleguezuelos

The article Francisca Pleguezuelos has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced BLP, September 2009

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 15:23, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Javier Moreno

The article Javier Moreno has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced BLP, May 2009

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 16:12, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Research survey invitation

Greetings Trilobite-

My name is Randall Livingstone, and I am a doctoral student at the University of Oregon, studying digital media and online community. I am posting to invite you to participate in my research study exploring the work of Wikipedia editors who are members of WikiProject: Countering Systemic Bias. The online survey should take 20 to 25 minutes to complete and can be found here:

https://oregon.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_cSHzuwaQovaZ6ss

Your responses will help online communication researchers like me to better understand the collaborations, challenges, and purposeful work of Wikipedia editors like you. In addition, at the end of the survey you will have the opportunity to express your interest in a follow-up online interview with the researcher.

This research project has been reviewed and approved by the Wikimedia Research Committee as well as the Office for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Oregon. For a detailed description of the project, please visit its Meta page. This survey is voluntary, and your confidentiality will be protected. You will have the choice of using your Wikipedia User Name during the research or creating a unique pseudonym. You may skip any question you choose, and you may withdraw at any time. By completing the survey, you are providing consent to participate in the research.

If you have any questions about the study, please contact me via my Talk Page (UOJComm) or via email. My faculty advisor is Dr. Ryan Light. If you have any questions regarding your rights as a research participant, please contact the Office for Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Oregon.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Randall Livingstone School of Journalism & Communication University of Oregon UOJComm (talk) 18:43, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Suspension of admin privileges due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative privileges of users who have been inactive for one year, meaning administrators who have made neither any edits nor any logged actions in over one year. As a result of this discussion, your administrative privileges have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these privileges reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. RL0919 (talk) 22:24, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Trilobite/archive&oldid=1140434811"