User talk:Cahk/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Possibly unfree Image:Bcplacemap.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bcplacemap.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Mdsummermsw (talk) 15:29, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

The maps are copyrighted. From [1] © 2007 BMO Bank of Montreal Vancouver Marathon. All Rights Reserved. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 19:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Per the tag "Please do not remove this notice while the question is being considered."
If you wish to assert that the copyright holder has released the maps under GNU, there is a procedure in place for that. The text you placed on Talk:Vancouver_Marathon is not sufficient. Via the formal procedure, the copyright holder would, in effect, be removing the copyright from the image.
Mdsummermsw (talk) 17:04, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Halfm.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Halfm.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Mdsummermsw (talk) 15:36, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Fullm.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Fullm.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Mdsummermsw (talk) 15:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


Fair use rationale for Image:Banner l.jpg

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 21:51, 18 January 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Shoulder-patch.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Shoulder-patch.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Iii063 19950017 arms2 gre s.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Iii063 19950017 arms2 gre s.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:BMO logo.png

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 02:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Colonial BadgeBlack.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Colonial BadgeBlack.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it may be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 13:13, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Public Seal of Hong Kong

It would explain why I couldn't get very many google results when researching it. Thank you very much for that! Biofoundationsoflanguage (talk) 17:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Template:Can LawEnforce‎

good point, hadn't looked at it like that. in the uk at least, manpower is an abstract noun, a concept. 'types of officer'? 'types of law enforcer'? ninety:one 18:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Westlife-related articles

the Westlife-related articles are all ok now. Thanks. TThe Love Album is already now ok too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Myxxd (talk • contribs) 14:11, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

Hi Cahk, just a quick note to let you know that I've added the Rollback tool to your account. Yours is the first account I've given this permission to, and after reviewing your contributions I think you can be trusted with it – please don't prove my judgement wrong! You might find it helpful to read through the page at Wikipedia:Rollback if you haven't already, and feel free to let me know if there are any problems with it —αlεx•mullεr 21:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello Cahk, based on this edit, I am concerned you don't understand vandalism reversion all that well, and as such should probably not have rollback. Rather then outright revoking it, I was wondering if you could perhaps allay that concern, and explain that comment? Thanks, Prodego talk 00:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Everyone makes mistakes in counter vandalism, but rollback should be used very carefully. Though most of your rollbacks have looked fine to me, this one did not strike me as vandalism. Especially when you are new to the tool, "measure twice and cut once". JackSchmidt (talk) 01:29, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Responded on JackSchmidt & Prodego --Cahk (talk) 02:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Howdy, unfortunately the edit you reverted was not "vandalism". The anon edit was merely wrong. The policy specifically say that:

Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not considered vandalism.

Now, absolutely you should correct the mistake the anon editor made! However, use the "undo" rather than "rollback", and give an edit summary like "revert: this has confused two distinct series by same author" or so. JackSchmidt (talk) 02:14, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry if I was not clear. Absolutely, copyvio should be reverted, and the offending url should be mentioned. If an editor continues to add copyvio's to wikipedia, they need to be blocked (and that typically requires a few warnings first). So definitely revert, just not using rollback. Rather use "undo", and give an edit summary such as "copyvio: http://www.voyageronline.com.au/books/title.cfm?ISBN=0732278511&Author=18". JackSchmidt (talk) 02:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Patch design.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Patch design.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:28, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

OOP

Please see the sources (external links) for those articles. I'm afraid we need to go by the documents, rather than personal speculation and rationales, otherwise we're engaging in Original Research which is not permitted. For example, see the official Table of Precedence for Ontario which makes no reference to the Queeen in the main table or footnotes. Reggie Perrin (talk) 10:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

My observation is "order of precedence" for a particular province refers specifically to the order for public officials from that province and doesn't include people from other jurisdictions. I assume, though, that if the Governor General were to visit a function in Manitoba she would be accommodated according to the federal rules of precedence, as would the Queen. We can't actually say that though without a source. Reggie Perrin (talk) 19:47, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

OOP

That looks credible. Go ahead and add it in but make sure to provide the source. Reggie Perrin (talk) 20:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

The Order of precedence in Saskatchewan is already laid out according to the information you provided. I don't know if we can assume that other provinces use the same protocol. Reggie Perrin (talk) 20:27, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, but beware of Original Research. We can only use published sources, not emails. If they put something up on a website - that's fine. Reggie Perrin (talk) 23:21, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:ECBadge.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:ECBadge.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:33, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:CBSA.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:CBSA.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

OOP

Is that written down in a published document or somewhere on the BC LG website? Given the SK evidence you provided I'm inclined now to think that you're correct but we really need documentation. Reggie Perrin (talk) 21:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

That's sufficient to add the Queen to the BC precedence page (she's already on the SK page). Is there anything similar on the LG websites for other provinces? I don't think you necessarily have to find a citation for each province but one or two more would be good for a "critical mass". Reggie Perrin (talk) 23:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I think you've proven your case. Just include the citation(s) when you edit the pages. Reggie Perrin (talk) 00:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
You should put in the source as a reference beside the entry for the Queen. Reggie Perrin (talk) 01:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, your edit note suggested you had just rolled back the edit and not added a citation. I see now that there are citations. Reggie Perrin (talk) 02:47, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:F 200611 november07 140873a.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:F 200611 november07 140873a.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-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 this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Polly (Parrot) 22:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:F 200611 november07 140873a.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:F 200611 november07 140873a.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:22, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Georgina Ahern

An editor has nominated Georgina Ahern, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Georgina Ahern and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 15:00, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Talk:New Zealand order of precedence

A reply's been written on that page. 118.90.114.226 (talk) 12:16, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

My edit to Lying From You

How was my edit vandalism? I thought it was a reasonable change. The song is rapcore (or rap rock if you will, I personally refer to it was rapcore) as it features rapping from Shinoda, as well as samples (the car burning out). Titan50 (talk) 21:03, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from, I have vandalised pages in the past ( :( ), but this was not meant as vandalism. Shall I revert the edit, or do you want me to leave it? Titan50 (talk) 21:07, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Case closed. [2]Cahk (talk) 21:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Westlife Sales

The problem is largely that there are no official figures for worldwide sales, so these are estimates and they vary, we have no idea where these figures are coming from or if they are simply made up by the newspapers, or, as i believe, are all sourced from a self published particular press release that contained the same figure, so i think the best thing to do is to include the word 'estimate' so people know its not official and include the lowest figure and the highest sourced figures. --neonwhite user page talk 02:05, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Westlife

Truly sorry about the citation formats. Thanks for pointing them out (:--Longyuano (talk) 07:44, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


Mr Niebla

I have already reported him for vandalism in relation to taking done the AfD tags and defacing three user pages after being warned. Just FYI.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 04:31, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Much appreciated.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 04:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Happy Easter.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 04:36, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the heads up. I left a note over there and will keep an eye on it. KnightLago (talk) 19:05, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Cahk! 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. Ale_Jrbtalk 15:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Report at AIV

Just to let you know that I am about to remove the ip report. If you are using a script to make the reports then you had best edit it to remove stuff about "vandalising after final warning" when it isn't the case. If you aren't using a script... please try and be accurate in the report. I am removing the report as the ip has not edited in a while and the ip may have been re-assigned. No point in blocking a potential good contributor. Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:57, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Someone else did the honours while I was explaining myself here... ;~) LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:58, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


Fair use rationale for Image:Badge-shoulder.jpg

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 21:28, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I didn't vandalize

I didn't vandalize, I was reading an article and it said I had a new message. It might be one of my family downstairs, I will check.

Do you have any suggestions to avoid this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.141.29.113 (talk) 22:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

From 71.145.162.149 ……

Please respect the fact that Wiki User: 71.145.162.169 is an IP Address and that it is a shared IP Address. We are really sorry for anything we did that was unconstructive and had no citations. We read the Wikipedia Policy and Etiquette. We'll be more careful in the future. We came in March 9, 2008. So we are new. We will read the Policy. Thank you for reading this message, Cahk.

71.145.162.149 (talk) 22:41, 29 March 2008 (UTC)71.145.162.149

Replied on talk page --User:Cahk (talk) 00:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Contact

Hi,

Sorry to bug you. I've a question that will, no doubt, mark me as something of an idiot; but, I'm sure you can help.

I'd like to contact someone who recently made an edit on an article, in order to ask him to clarify a statement; how do I do this? Thanks

Alban —Preceding unsigned comment added by Albanman (talk • contribs) 16:43, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

vandalproof bug

Did you ever get your vandalproof issue resolved? I haven't been able to log in since I was approved and it didn't seem like there was any new discussion on the talk page.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 07:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Darn it. Oh well. Thanks for letting me know, still no joy on my side either (obviously).--Torchwood Who? (talk) 07:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
I do enjoy my twinkle with rollback too, but I was hoping for a better way to organize my recent changes patrolling. I jumped in twice so far, but it's a little overwhelming right off the bat.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 07:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Editing Bertie Ahern

Reference to children and grandchildren are peripheral to the main character and distract the narrative of the subject and where relevant belong to a footnote only. Ahern's children and grand-children are independent of Ahern and are appropriate only as a footnote, to an article on Ahern, if at all. 02:35, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:140px-Saskatoonpolice.gif}

Thank you for uploading Image:140px-Saskatoonpolice.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

194.46.229.3

Ah, yes. That would be one of the many IPs of the elusive person who you, I and others have continued to revert on Bertie Ahern's page. I've undone the most recent and I guess that'll put the page back on watch. This isn't the first time he or she has responded in this manner. Therequiembellishere (talk) 03:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

User:75.145.162.169 on the verge.

Before you say anything, I know you want me (us) to create an account on Wikipedia and you already told me! For the last time, I didn't vandalize the pages!! I'm just a noob. But I've gotten better over 2008. I know the warnings are not from me only and since Wikipedia is based on concensus.

71.145.162.149 (talk) 17:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC) User:75.145.162.169


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:APD Patch.gif}

Thank you for uploading Image:APD Patch.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 19:38, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

More universities

Which ones? GreenJoe 03:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'll add them to my watch list. Does BC have enough Universities now? :p GreenJoe 03:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't disagree with Emily Carr. The Ontario College of Art & Design is technically a University. And your UC's never made sense to me. But yeah, it does seem a bit too much. The way Capilano College's site reads, I get the impression their "bid" came out after the report from the people recommending the 3 UC's be upgraded. GreenJoe 04:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I took the initiative to create Uni category's for all the org's, and to add the BC Uni template to the article's. Didn't really make sense to create cat's based on their current name. GreenJoe 22:14, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
The name of the article is staying as-is for now. GreenJoe 22:18, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

So how many graduates of a BC University does it take change in a light bulb? GreenJoe 21:41, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

None. The admission standards for a University in BC were so low that the light bulb decided to go to University itself and seek that change. (Perhaps Trinity Western University?!?) Once there, he knew that BC had such a wild Uni party scene that he got sloshed, and convicted of drunk driving. The end. GreenJoe 21:48, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Oh boy, you really need to go to bed. First I was highlighting your fear of lower admission standards. Two, I was taking a direct hit at TWU, and three, I was giving a blow to low BC admissions standards. Get some sleep and then re-read it. GreenJoe 22:08, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Sleep is good for the soul. GreenJoe 22:43, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
May-schmay. Get sleep now, ask me how!! GreenJoe 00:29, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Univ.

No, those are already Universities!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.60.37 (talk) 22:24, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

They are already Universities now24.84.60.37 (talk) 22:31, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I just added Universities' names that they officially became Universities already.24.84.60.37 (talk) 22:45, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Oh, so they are not Universities yet. The News I read was false. When will they become "OFFICIALLY" Universities???24.84.60.37 (talk) 22:50, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
The websites of schools said "We anticipate legislation to establish the new mandate for our institution will come into effect by May 2008." It's only 5days away... They are going to be Universities for sure. Why shouldn't we add them on the list??24.84.60.37 (talk) 22:55, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I understood. They might officially become Universities, but "legally." Let's leave them for a while.24.84.60.37 (talk) 23:14, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Ahern/Cowen help

The IP (this time as 194.46.235.142) deleted the presidents again, and with the change, I can't watch the two at once. Could you please have the lot blocked? Therequiembellishere (talk) 01:47, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, just thought you were. What should the appropriate action be? I wasn't successful the last time I tried because I hadn't sufficiently warned them. Therequiembellishere (talk) 18:48, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Universities

Cool, thanks. I was just going by what I saw in the articles as I came across them, really. Bearcat (talk) 05:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I won't say "I told you so"...

...but I told you so! GBT/C 06:58, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Did I accuse you of biting? I don't believe so - I was pointing out that care should be taken when one is dealing with an editor who could be editing an article about themselves - yes, there's a COI, but there are also BLP concerns. There's a useful guideline around here somewhere, but I can't lay my hands on it at the moment - if I come across it I'll post you a link. GBT/C 07:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

BC Uni list

We should use Wikipedia's own precedent, not that of the BC gov. I'm willing to discuss it, but your order isn't alphabetical. GreenJoe 15:24, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Okanagan College

Hey, I could use your help. If you could add Okanagan College to your watch list, it seems to be the small target; having some school multimedia club trying to add their link to the article. Thanks. GreenJoe 23:40, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Kevin Annett

Thanks for the message - probably pretty inevitable, I guess. Anyway, the threat's been blanked, and he's been warned - as recent deletion reviews like this article's have shown, just because someone wants their page gone doesn't mean it'll go. Whether that's the right approach or not, I don't know. GBT/C 12:30, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Colonial BadgeBlack.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Colonial BadgeBlack.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --02:09, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Template talk:Csa

I've started a mini-RFC over at Template talk:Csa and I'd love your feedback. Thanks. GreenJoe 12:09, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.