User talk:E dog95

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Contents

[edit] Swedish article about Jezper Söderlund

You could create an article about Jezper Söderlund in Swedish in the Swedish Wikipedia at http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jezper_Söderlund --Eastmain 14:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Amprobe Clamp Meter.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Amprobe Clamp Meter.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the revert

...on my talk page. Cheers! Flyguy649 talk contribs 06:50, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

...from me as well. Cheers! Dust Filter 01:43, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
you're both quite welcome... :D E_dog95Talk Contribs 04:49, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Oregon invitation

You are invited to join WikiProject Oregon, a WikiProject dedicated to improving articles related to the U.S. state of Oregon. You received this invitation because of your interest in Oregon and/or your edits to Oregon articles. If you would like to join, please visit the project page, and add your name to the list of participants.

Katr67 19:38, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandal blocked

User:No vandalism no has been indefinitely blocked by me. See his talk page.Rlevse 01:34, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blanking of talk page

Please note that, although blanking is frowned upon, it is not actually forbidden, and is not a blockable offense. Cheers. --DarkFalls talk 07:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Along the same lines, please don't revert the Squeakytoad talk page when it is blanked. The content on it is not only old, but an editor has informed me that I have permission to do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.157.174.205 (talk) 13:34, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IT Facts Source

Hi. I removed the source that pointed to http://www.itfacts.biz/index.php?id=P7697 because IT Facts does not meet the WP:Source guidelines, which require that the source be "trustworthy or authoritative." IT Facts is an anonymous site with no notability or verifiability about who runs it or the source of their information. The new sources you put in are much better. :) Collectonian 07:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nicole Atkins

Hi. Apologies for the delay; I have been out of the Country. As you say, the two parameters you mention would satisfy WP:MUSIC. I will restore the article, but will, of course, depend on you to insert the additional data. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 18:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Works of the US Federal Government are public domain

Hi, I saw your two copyvio listings. Works that are produced by the US Federal Government, including all of its agencies (DOD, NASA, etc.) are public domain (copyright-free). Such works can be used for any purpose, including modification and redistribution by Wikipedia. The two articles you listed did have their sources referenced in the article footer. Please keep this in mind when looking into future potential copyright violations. Thanks. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 14:36, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bipolar Disorder

Hi. Can you please explain to me what Tarnation has to do with the article on bipolar disorder?

Thanks. DeeKenn (talk) 01:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

OK. I figured you were linking to the film. What I don't understand is what the film has to do with the article? DeeKenn (talk) 03:02, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Cool. I haven't seen the film but I heard it's riveting. DeeKenn (talk) 15:29, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Feel My Heart edit

Regarding this edit, note that references in languages other than English are acceptable per our policy, and they are left there so that others can corroborate the information from the article (in this case, single listing, release date and Oricon chart information). Cheers! -- ReyBrujo (talk) 00:23, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

The Avex Net link is the official page for the CD, giving information about the songs, release date and format. The Oricon one gives information about the song lyrics writer (作詞), compositor (作曲) and arrangement (編曲), in this case all are Mitsuru Igarashi (五十嵐充). The Oricon link also used to give information about the amount of weeks the single/album spent in the Oricon Top 100, and the highest peak, but that information is not available right now (the archived version says "最高位：24位　登場回数：14回", which means "highest rank: 24; frequency: 14 times". I am still waiting to see if the ranking and times ranked return to the page, otherwise I will have to switch everything to the archived version. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 01:24, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted and moved

Done per your requests at my talk page. Please check to see that I haven't screwed anything up! -- Flyguy649 talk 09:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of 2008 Vancouver tornado

A tag has been placed on 2008 Vancouver tornado requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Transcendence (talk) 22:56, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 2008 Vancouver tornado

Hi there :) I'd just like to say that you're doing a great job at writing the article for the 2008 Vancouver tornado, but I advise that when creating articles, you add the {{underconstruction}} tag to the top of the page, to alert speedy deletion taggers that the article is still in progress. This will avoid having the article tagged as requiring deletion, as in this case, it didn't need to be deleted straight away. Just some friendly advice :) Cheers, Spebi 23:10, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

IMO, unless it can be expanded to at least Start-class, it is not notable enough and should be moved to Tornadoes of 2008#January 10 (Northwest US). Also it should be 2008 Vancouver, Washington tornado as it could confuse people thinking it was in Vancouver, British Columbia (since most people outside the region think of that when they think of simply Vancouver). CrazyC83 (talk) 13:34, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] External links: Lego & Yahoo!

I see you've deleted my recent addition to the Lego and Yahoo! wikis, citing them as advertising. I can assure you that the resource linked to is independent research carried out by the UK Design Council, a not-for-profit government organisation that aims to raise awareness of design. It does not seek to sell any products or promote any particular agenda apart from the resources themselves. This research provides excellent insight in to the design process of these companies and I thought it would be a useful resource for Wikipedia users. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Designcouncil (talk • contribs) 11:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Categories

Articles should be classified with like articles at the most specific category. The categories that these sub categories roll up into should not be listed in the article in most cases. Consider for a second if ever vehicle was listed in Category:Vehicles. How usable would that category be? The categories need to be managed to keep them useful. Also, an article can exist in multiple sub categories. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] question

i'm looking at the Ayaan Hirsi Ali article and trying to revert it back to the version before the edit war. how do i do that? i know how to simply undo the last edit, but not from past versions. i'm going to report 76.220.202.205 in a little bit if he/she doesn't stop making such huge edits without consensus. i'm contacting you because i saw you talk on his/her talkpage. thanks.--AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 11:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Doran - Monuments cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Doran - Monuments cover.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) 20:02, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Please refrain from vandalizing the Wafa Sultan article again. You already pushed the limits when you replaced reliable newspaper articles with references citing Wikipedia as a source. I do not know or care about your agenda, but I ask you to keep your self-respect and leave the article be. Wafa Sultan is Sunni and nothing can change it. Please refrain from doing more damage to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.177.170 (talk) 19:37, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chris Cornell

Could you please tell me why you have removed the entry for my site at www.chriscornell.org.uk? You say "we don't link to fansites", yet I see them on artist pages throughout Wikipedia and was unaware of any official policy on this. If there is one, could you show me where it's stated? Fan-run sites are frequently as valuable a resource as corporate-run sites. My site is unofficial but is one of the major resources providing up-to-date news for fans of the artist, who has also contributed material to it such as exclusive interviews. You have however left the link in place for Fresh Deadly Raities, another fansite. Surely this is inconsistent whatever the policy is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clarefromscotland (talk • contribs) 18:39, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chris Cornell site link removal: response

I'm sorry, I disagree with your interpretation of policy and I am going to reinstate the link, mainly because the site in question is generally acknowledged as the #1 source for daily news updates on the artist's activities and tour. At present it carries more up-to-date and relevant information than the official site; if someone is coming to Wikipedia for info on Cornell's current activities, they are more likely to find it there than anywhere else. If you are going to leave a memorabilia collection like "Fresh Deadly Rarities" in place, then you cannot really justify removing my site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clarefromscotland (talk • contribs) 19:19, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chris Cornell page: please stop removing this link

I was under the impression that no-one was "in charge" here, yet you continue to repeatedly remove the link. Please desist. I have already explained the situation about the site and what it offers. I do not understand what you mean by "conflict of interest" or "advertising" - this is a not-for-profit site which offers a free resource and extensive information for fans of the artist which is not available at the official site. By removing this, you effectively deny relevant time-sensitive information to those looking for it in Wikipedia and reduce the net information value of the page as a resource. There is no rule that says "official sites" necessarily have the most accurate or the most recent information available.

You may also not perhaps realise that the link to my site has on the Wikipedia page for most of the past year before you removed it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clarefromscotland (talk • contribs) 19:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ISS six crew members - thanks!

Thanks very much for so quickly finding an excellent reference that discusses why the International Space Station needs a crew of six. That's much better than merely indicating the plan is for a crew that size! Really, adding this reference is a huge improvement to the article! (sdsds - talk) 02:07, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I did seem to be in the right place at the right time for that tidbit. Glad there's two of us that are happy :). E_dog95 Hi 03:20, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Colonization of the moon

I really have no opinion, being something of a newbie to Wikipedia. I have lots of things (I think) I know about physics and astronomy, but am still barely oriented w/r wiki culture and customs. I mistakenly reverted that editor's changes to both space colonization & colonization of the moon before I came into doubt and checked Google, where I discovered that Peter was correct. But the other editor missed one incorrect occurrence, so maybe I got 'em all. Cheers, Wwheaton (talk) 00:59, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chill

An edit summary omission is hardly worth a talk page comment. Andre (talk) 18:53, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Do not revert good faith edits or you will be blocked. Andre (talk) 19:46, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm contributing to wikipedia by the book. Now who needs to "chill". Eating ur own words. Don't offer me that blocking rubbish. Again, I'm playing by the rules. I Always have here.

Have a nice weekend.

E_dog95 Hi 19:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

You reverted my edit first, instead of asking for an explanation on my talk page or on the article's talk page. There is no way to justify reverting a good faith correction with the reasoning that it lacked an edit summary. If you continue this practice, you will be blocked. Andre (talk) 20:05, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Please read Edit_summary#Recommendations for details on how to use the edit summary. E_dog95 Hi 03:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Black hole.jpg

You uploaded Image:Black hole.jpg, which overlaid an image with that same name which already existed. I've reverted your image to the previous one, please reupload your image with a different name. Corvus cornixtalk 22:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Cool, thanks.  :) Corvus cornixtalk 22:17, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Wonder if this sig is going to work. Oh and thanks for the talk

EclipseAgent (talk) 15:24, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 2008 unrest in Lebanon

Ok sure. was just trying to help. --MatchStickEleven (talk) 13:03, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

(moving item to bottom) E_dog95 Hi 21:16, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] PDF

Hi. I am needing help regarding pdf files that have been uploaded as images. I'm sorting images related to vehicles and have noticed that there are a few of these floating around. I came to you because I saw you've done some work with images at Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion. Any ideas (for deletion)? E_dog95 Hi 06:53, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I normally just list them at WP:IFD if they are obviously copyvio. Kelly hi! 06:54, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
They're now speediable, {{db-i10}}. Stifle (talk) 13:56, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notes versus references

Hi, look in the Manual of style which allows for a notes section and a bibliography or reference section. Whether or not the information is specifically noted for the text, the articles in the reference section provide background and confirmation. This is typical of WP articles and specifically a hedge against an AfD where multiple references help satisfy the notability criteria at WP:N. A typical format is to include the detail for all references in the reference or biblio section and then just provide brief mention from the notes (e.g., Spurr pg 105). At WP we do not have the provision for separate sets of informational and citation footnote, thus we put them into one section where note 5 could be a clarification of detail while note 6 is a citation. We don't have rigid standards at WP. Thanks! --Kevin Murray (talk) 23:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC) PS: are you a Catalina sailor? I have a C380 on San Francisco Bay.

Why now? I added back the items you deleted from the references into the separate reference section as a compromise. Also I began the references on this article about 2 years ago when I had less experience at WP. Why are you making this an issue? Just please move on, as my change is within WP standards and the dispute is now over your preference or mine, and you seem to arbitrarily pushing your POV at an article where I have a long standing of hard work. I think that I have offered a simple compromise. --Kevin Murray (talk) 23:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
OK and thanks! FYI, I'm not familiar with ease of verifiability being a criterion. I'm pretty active in the policy and guideline pages most specifically helping to rewrite the notability page last year and merging ORG and CORP from a big mess to the lesser mess today. Never have I seen lack of ease as an issue. We work under the premise of assume good faith. I'm not sure if you've been in the position of defending a good article against an ill formed but persuasive AfD. I have a very good track record of perserving articles through persuasive footnotes and reference sections. But we've lost a lot of good boating articles to adolecent AfD gunslingers trying to win their admin wings. Cheers!--Kevin Murray (talk) 23:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the cooperation if not agreement. --Kevin Murray (talk) 05:44, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Image:Cvt.pdf

While most pdf files uploaded to Wikipedia are useless, it's important to check their content and licensing in case any useful media or text could be salvaged. I've run across several new accounts posting legitimate articles in pdf format, in those cases it's easy to format the embedded text to comply with wiki markup, but the original upload counts as edit history and must be referenced. In rarer cases, like Image:Cvt.pdf, the uploader wanted to offer a scalable version of Image:Cvt.png. While SVG is the format of choice for such diagrams, pdfs could just as easily suffice, or at least be converted. I think there's a decent case to be made for transferring similar vector/rich text pdfs to the Wikimedia Commons, for later use or conversion to the SVG format. Your mileage may vary and in the vast majority of cases pdf files qualify for I10 deletion. Make sure to check their contents, though, just in case. Cheers, ˉˉanetode╦╩ 23:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Little context in Category:Yamaha motorcycle images

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Yamaha motorcycle images, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Yamaha motorcycle images 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 Category:Yamaha motorcycle images, 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. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 22:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)