User talk:Zpb52/Archive1

Opryland USA

Please help us clean this up by getting specific about what needs to be corrected/upgraded. Rlquall 04:49, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Previous Results"

The problem with leaving it is that since the one column is labelled Winning Team and the other Losing Team, the articles are factually incorrect. I don't think letting the inaccuracy hang around for a month is a good idea. This presents a danger to the casual reader, not to mention the general credibility of Wikipedia. Autiger 03:38, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And now you'll see that partisans are going to continue to swap the order of the teams for the next month as is starting in Fiesta Bowl. Autiger 05:13, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WSMV-TV

Actually, according to WKRN's history page, it was the CBS affiliate with a secondary ABC affiliation for a year after its sign-on as WSIX in 1953 before WLAC signed on in 1954. It's been a full ABC affiliate since then. See for yourself. Blueboy96

Image Tagging Image:CountryMusicHallofFame1967.jpg

This image may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:CountryMusicHallofFame1967.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --OrphanBot 06:26, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE:-TV/DT

No they wernt, all the changes i have made can be verfied via the FFC TV Database which designates the callsign of record. You can all check by clicking on the "Query the FCC's TV station database for..." link in the external links section in each article. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 08:17, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If i am reading your post correctly, then you are incorrect. The is no regulation on the use of -DT in the call sign of a station, nor is the -DT call suffix being issued for new or existing station, digital or analog. The current MO by the FCC is to grandfather the currently used calls to the digital stations, this is backed up by your example WSB, which list the call for both it digital and analog as WSB-TV. The thing that your are sighting is the Service Designation, which is listed as TV, DT, based upon the service of the transmitter, but has no bearing of the official FCC designated call sign, in which the article names are from. You might want to examine the FCC regulations on call signs, [1], [2].--Boothy443 | trácht ar 04:55, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If ai am so wrong, why is this rule not in the regulations, why does it not show up on the datebase, why has their been no change in the lics of the stations. Digital only stations also floolow these rules, as well, i have yet to see one station that is officialy a -DT station. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 07:08, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thought I'd weigh in on this topic. There are alot of U.S. TV stations that are licenced with a callsign ending with -TV, some with -LP, and some with -CA. Most are just the call lettters with no postfix. However there are currently only 9, yes nine, stations licenced by the FCC with a callsign ending with -DT. There are currently more stations with -DR callsigns (17) then that. I got these numbers by doing an FCC database search by state, for each state, and searched the results for the string '-D'. This gave me hits for both -DT and -DR stations. If all stations have call letters with -TV or -DT at the end, why are they not listed as such in the FCC database? Please show me a rule or law from an official government site stating what you claim. —A 09:05, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh forgot to include this, I have compiled the list of all stations that have a callsign ending in either -DT or -DR. If anyone finds anymore please add them to a list. If it ever gets over 20 or so stations I'll move it to a non-user page. User:А/-DT Television stations —A 09:06, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One last thing. Article names are to be the fcc assigned call letters of the station the article is about with very few exceptions. As I say in the template I use for renaming station articles: "Consensus on both WP:NC#Broadcasting and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Television_Stations#Article_names is that the article name should reflect the actual call letters of the TV station." If anyone doesn't like this, it should be discussed at one of those locations. As per the content of the page, I usualy only change the call letters in an infobox and leave the text how it is. However, I always remove the -DT unless the station is one of the sacred 9. Using this moniker with a callsign is just a marketing tool and not factual. This is an encyclopedia, so unless you are talking about how "this station uses the -DT at the end of their call sign even though it is not their call sign" or something along those lines, we should leave it off wikipedia. —A 09:28, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:BenH#Commas

Regarding your comment at User talk:BenH#Commas: Please don't BITE the newbies. ^Blank ^Verse 10:21, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Country Music Hall of Fame

Sorry to bother you about those links - thx for clarifying & blanking Trödeltalk 08:52, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Country Music Hall of Fame.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Country Music Hall of Fame.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 08:10, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

vrrayman#

Thanks, I'll keep my eyes open and put any of his target articles on my watchlist. --O bli (Talk)^? 09:19, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Randall's IP appears to be static as he's used it several times to register his names and make "anonymous" edits. Will a longer (dare I say indefinite) ban be considered if he makes the odd rash of edits again? --KHill-LTown 00:15, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AWB

I've added your name, I hope you get it to work, I sure didn't :( -O bli (Talk)^? 11:17, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Randallrobinstine IP permenantly blocked

I reported Randallrobinstine's IP address to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism after receiving your tip-off, and it was soon after permenantly blocked by an administrator. Since it seems to be static, as a user commented above, this may be the last of his causing trouble on Wikipedia. - Conrad Devonshire 02:57, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leavenworth cable listings

Please don't restore prod notices as you did here. Because prod is for uncontroversial deletions only, once the tag is removed, it should not be restored. If you think the article still should be deleted, you should move the discussion to AfD. See WP:PROD#What this process is NOT for. NickelShoe (Talk) 03:01, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I stand by deprodding the article. Uncontroversial means what it says. The article deserves to be deleted, perhaps, but not thru prod. NickelShoe (Talk) 04:20, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Spike TV Logo

The new logo is in a press release on Zap2It [3]. No exact date was specified, but it sounded like it was coming. RexTraverse 07:24, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comma

Which article was specifically wrong in this usage? Rlquall 10:41, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

69.176.39.248 report on WP:RFI

Hi Zpb52. Please note that I've archived or removed your recent request for investigation. That page is only for very specific cases, as described by the page's guidelines. Your alert would be better placed on Administrator intervention against vandalism (WP:AIV), where it will usually be processed within minutes. Many alerts that are incorrectly placed on Requests for investigation are never dealt with, simply because they become old before an administrator gets to them. Thanks for your efforts. :) Petros471 12:52, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Zpb52! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. PS2pcGAMER (talk) 09:58, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commas

I'll work on this, and am glad that there are Wikipedians that are sticklers for grammar. I'm assuming that you have corrected most of this, and I don't have to fix these articles, huh? Question: are you the main author/creator of the Nashville radio templates?

Rlquall 20:48, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since you're technically sharp, would you consider updating/expanding the Nashville AM template to reflect that some of the callsigns/freqs have changed?

Rlquall 02:16, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Rlquall 02:29, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, you are adding POV

I am correcting the article to read what our company does.

Dealt with

Well, I solved the whole issue by deleting the article as a non notable company and then realized I didn't give a brief block, I was cleaning the list and I guess it passed thru my fingers, sorry -- Tawker 06:39, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The U

The U has a disambiguation page, I am moving all the The U (Miami) pages to Miami Hurricanes football. The page gives all info on the subject.

It should go to the University's site, not the football team's site --Zpb52 07:30, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The previous article The U (Miami) only describes the football team that is why I redirected the link to the football team article. If it should redirect to the University thats fine. The web site for the University only mentions the name U of M from what I've noticed.

RE: VandalProof

Add {{subst:navpop}} to User:Zpb52/monobook.js. I'd do it myself, but the page appears to be protected. --Xyra e l ^T 15:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have been using Vandalproof for all of about an hour and a half. I'm still trying to figure out things myself. Ted 02:45, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been using the various buttons in the program. I don't think I have changed anything. I have no idea why you don't get an edit summary. Ted 02:55, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What the...I haven't said anything to anybody recently. Everyking 03:32, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is user Crboyer. I also go by several usernames, including 24.98.43.130. You recently reverted an edit of mine on the 53rd Annual Golden Globe nominees page. The previous user who updated the site incorrectly stated that Ed Harris won the Golden Globe for Apollo 13, rather than the actual winner, Brad Pitt (for 12 Monkeys). I didn't think of putting a edit summary because I didn't think of it. My mistake. So please, can the edit go back? Crboyer proof I'm not being a vandal: [4]

You used VandalProof to revert an edit in the Birth Control article. The edit may not have been appropriate to the article, or just in bad taste, but it was not vandalism. You should have just removed it and discussed it on the talk page. Women do tend to be very passionate about their birth control method of choice. (Have you ever seen the episodes of Seinfeld dealing with "the sponge?") Please be more careful about labeling something vandalism, because you can get the person who edited the page banned for it. MamaGeek Joy 12:05, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

?

What did I do wrong? 132.241.246.111 04:22, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:166.66.16.116

It's too bad we can't protect a user's talk page from that user eh? --Charlie^{(@CIRL | talk)} 07:35, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Union support of Minutemen

If you read the discussion page, there are no reputable sources for the comments being made. Nowhere on the Unions's website can you find the comment and the article used as a reference does not contain the name of ONE union member. Basically, the source can not be verified so it should not be included. -Rafanetx 08:13, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar!!!

I noticed that you've been fighting vandalism for quite some time, and as far as I can tell you are yet to recieve a barnstar for your hard work and dedication. Therefore so I would like to present you this:

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your continued, constant & consistent vigilance against vandalism. Charlie^(@CIRL

Be sure to let me know if you're ever up for a RfA so I can support you. Regards --Charlie^{(@CIRL | talk)} 08:23, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From Soso

From Soso Dear Zpb52, I do not believe you are consulting the sources from all points of view. This article primarily represents a biased view point. I can cite a Georgian Encyclopedia and many other sources that say different from that. Considering we are discussing an antiquity, there can't be 100% source that tells that Bagrationi were Georgian and not Armenian. So, please understand the Georgian point of view and tell me how I can bring back my article, because the article is about Georgian Kings and can't be written from the Armenian view point. I don’t know what nationality are you, but it is like saying the Queen of England is Portuguese. So, please advise something. I would like to discuss something with you to justify my action of changing link. I realize that I was kind of emotional too when I posted message. Fist of all, Bagrationis were from the principality of Speri, which was not part of Georgia or Armenia either, but later it would become the territory of Georgia and then Turks took over Byzantine Empire and attacked weak Georgia. Like Niccolo Machiavelli would say, "Princes lived as divine rulers ad would not be attacked if they did not make themselves hated and when they brought together their principalities they would create their kingdom." Bagrationis did not even rule Armenia. Armenians used to stick with Georgia in Wars against conquerors, so since they were Georgian kings they should be written from Georgian point of view. So, I think that "Bagrationi" link should go "Bagrationi Dynasty" and so-called "Bagratid" link should go to so-called "Bagratid dynasty". Please let me know what do you think. I think I should direct "Bagrationi" link to "Bagrationi Dynasty" and create separate "Bagratid" link to "Bagratid Dynasty"
Soso

User:RossPatterson

Thanks for cleaning up my talk page and warning the anon. off. I was busy with something else and hadn't noticed it yet. Again, thanks. RossPatterson 01:39, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Nomination

Charlie Huggard would like to nominate you to be an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Charlie Huggard to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Zpb52/Archive1. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

Best of luck! --Charlie^{(@CIRL | talk)} 02:33, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but . . .

I appreciate your attempt to keep my profile from being "vandalized" by 69.137.238.217, but, er. . . I am 69.137.238.217 :)

I'm in the bad habit of not being logged in when I edit things. I'll try to be better about that in the future. Sailorptah 02:42, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there

My name is Steven Leventhal (living in Boston, Massachusetts, USA).

You contacted me while online in Wikipedia to say that you reverted some edit(s) I made to the "Blood Sweat & Tears" article (though I couldn't see what you reverted). I've made various edits here and there on Wikipedia the past two months or so . . . not ever having pre-planned to go onto Wikipedia with the idea of making edits but just as a reader. Yet, at times, I'd read articles that I'd looked up and found some of them in need of editing (e.g., spelling or grammatical or phrasing errors, factual errors or omissions, et al). I can assure you that I am not a vandal of any type. I would never ever engage in any behavior that is unethical or criminal or irresponsible. I am, however, very new to all the methods that have been mentioned that any contributors should use or take advantage of (for instance, you mentioned "edit summary" and this section that we are in mentions ending your comment with four tilde signs). These are concepts and practices that I'll have to get familiar with, as well as giving myself a username and being more formally known to the Wikipedia contributor community.

I have edited the "Blood Sweat & Tears" article before. In fact, the whole first paragraph was a major rewrite that I did perhaps about 1.5 to 2 months ago. It originally was a somewhat shorter paragraph that simply stated that BS&T was "an American rock-and-roll group". This was hardly a fitting description of what they were; that is an rather intellectually lazy description of them. My rewrite of the first paragraph is much more a fitting summarization of what they were about. My rewrite of the original first paragraph (from 1.5 to 2 months ago) reads as follows:

"Blood, Sweat & Tears was an American music group, formed in New York City in 1967, which fused jazz and rock or pop music into a hybrid of what came to be known as "jazz-rock". They are considered, by and large, to be the first or among the first of this genre of music. Somewhat unlike what became known as "jazz fusion" or simply as "fusion" (which often tended more toward virtuostic displays of electronic experimentation and amodal music), Blood, Sweat & Tears' sound was more a merging of the varied stylings of rock, pop and R&B/soul music with big band or combo jazz."

What you read in the above paragraph is indicative of the type of rewrite that I do (other than a simple spelling or grammatical correction). I **DO** know how to keep an NPOV and would never state details or facts that are questionable or debatable (unless they were labeled as such or as conjecture).

I made no other edits to that BS&T article other than the first paragraph . . . until today. In particular, the article had said that the group got its name from a 1963 Johnny Cash album. I simply added that it was Al Kooper who was said to have chosen this name but added the word "purportedly" as well, being that an interview with Bobby Colomby on Drummerworld's web site stated that this was "Al's version". So, in case there is any disagreement among some of the past members or founders of the band as to how the name was chosed, I added "purportedly".

As I hope you can tell from what was stated here, I hope I impress you as a person of integrity, not as one who is among those reprehensible persons whom are referred to as "vandals" Though I do need to get familiar with how to cite sources, use the four tilde symbols, give "edit summaries, pick some user name (should it be my real name? or some type of code name?), et al.

Other examples of edits I've done on Wikipedia:

(1) In the article on the city of Chicago, it stated that the Chicago metropolitan area has 12 theological schools (university level) but then only listed 10 of them . . . leaving out two of the most prominent ones (Wheaton College and Trinity Evangelical Divinity School). So I added in the mention of those schools.

(2) In the article on Russell Conwell (a rather short article), a preeminent theologician and author of the late 1800s and early 1900s who founded my alma mater, Temple University), I added the last paragraph in that 3-paragraph article (missing information about him), which reads as follows:

"His name lives on, as well, in the present-day Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary (with campuses in South Hamilton and Boston, Massachusetts and Charlotte, North Carolina). This interdenominational evangelical theological seminary was formed in 1969 by the merger of two former divinity schools (Conwell School of Theology of Temple University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and Gordon Divinity School in Wenham, Massachusetts)."

As I hope you can see, my edits are well-intentioned and meant to be factual and well-written.

70.19.142.9 02:47, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually

You warned me about an article that was non-notable, J C Penny's. That's actually a redirect, and the CSD given was that it was implausible. No biggie, man, but you might want to catch some shut-eye. ;) Happy editing! Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 05:00, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edits on Gibdo/ Koopa Troopa

Sorry about no summery on my edits. I found these two were in "Super Smash Brothers Fighters" catagory, when they obviously aren't. It'd be nice if that was reverted.

Re : 69.176.39.248

I gave it the usual 24 hours, cost' brief look at the talkpage doesn't appear to be that notorious to me (in comparison to others) added with some bit of good faith and possibility of collatertal damage. That being said, I have noted your message and will take that into consideration the next time round. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 01:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Total giggle

Hi, Zack. The test to my userpage was by my husband, so we could see what our current IP is. In the few seconds between the time he added the test with his computer, and the time I got to MY computer to look at it, the change was gone. I stood openmouthed and confused for a minute, until I realized that he'd just been reverted really fast. Nice work. Joyous | Talk 02:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Jim -> Rome

IMO, "Rome" sounds less colloquial than "Jim" and thus more proper for the article; also, "Rome" is used in the article a lot more than "Jim," so it was also to give consistency. Willbyr (talk · contribs)