User talk:L'Aquatique/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Hahaha, oh wow!

The Special Barnstar
I am awarding you the Special Barnstar for beating me to making an Alaska barnstar by over three months. Keep up the good work, and happy editing! --Merovingian (T, C) 05:03, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Homebridge, actually. I'm a senior, been homeschooled since 7th grade. Might have something to do with my lack of a real social life.  :) Anyways, I'll be ditching town in April, won't have to worry about that silly stuff. Regards, --Merovingian (T, C) 14:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
That's right! Time's going so fast, I almost miss everything already. --Merovingian (T, C) 02:51, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:User Cascadian

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

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:29, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:User accessibility advocate2

A tag has been placed on Template:User accessibility advocate2 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:User nw

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

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Heyas

I stumbled onto an WP:AN dealing with Hopiakuta, Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Wiki editor DonFphrnqTaub Persina and just wanted to congratulate you on the patience and kindness you showed, which was followed by a 'holy crap, i might actually know you!' reaction when I read your userpage :) If I believed in barnstars I would give you one for the dedication you displayed to helping this user and making the 'pedia a more open place for all. -Mask? 05:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey, thanks! I only wish I had more time to spend doing that stuff. From your user page, I see that you are no longer in Juneau, which is a bummer. I love it here! l'aqùatique talk 00:37, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blue-Legged Hermit Crab

Hi, L'Aqua. I know you're the aquarium person here, so I'd like you to help me expand this article, from which I understand is quite common. Thanks, and drop me a line at my talk page. bibliomaniac15 00:48, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered by SatyrBot around 17:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC) SatyrBot (talk) 17:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Rollback

Hiya. I've granted your request for rollback. Please remember to only use it for obvoius vandalism. Any queries please feel free to ask me or any other admin or rollbacker. Pedro :  Chat  07:08, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

You got it! Thanks for your time. L'Aquatiquetalk 07:30, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Welcome. Pedro :  Chat  15:53, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Backlog at Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user

Caution There is currently a backlog of 53 users at Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user. Please consider offering adoption to one or more of these users. Don't forget to change their {{adoptme}} template to {{adoptoffer|L'Aquatique/Archive 2}}. Thank you for your continued participation in Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. xenocidic (talk) 19:52, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Homosexuality

Further information: Talk:Homosexuality#Lead image

(moved from Vantucky's Talk)You'll have to forgive me for potentially being dense, but what exactly was the meaning of this edit? I reverted it because it looks an awful lot like vandalism, but imagine my surprise when... it's a edit from an admin!
Now, I am all for non-censorship, swearing until my fucking ears bleed, and yes, consenting naked dudes in the shower. But doesn't putting up a picture like that sort of give readers the wrong idea, especially when "promiscuity" is a really awful stereotype associated with homosexuality?
 Now, given that there's a tag saying you're away, I'm a little worried you've been hacked. Please, explain to me what is going on here?!
L'Aquatique[talk] 07:27, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism? How could adding an image of what are obviously homosexuals to the homosexuality article be vandalism? And "no censorship" doesn't really apply in this case, it's just two guys with their shirts off embracing, it's not sex or other adult content. If you want to dicker about how good the image is at illustrating the subject, that's fine of course, but vandalism? I think you need to work a little harder to assume good faith. VanTucky 07:37, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
(moved from Vantucky's talk) I disagree. I've had that page on my watchlist for a long time, and it gets vandalised all the time and honestly, that does seem like a vandal edit to me. I think of it this way: there isn't a picture of a naked man and a woman in the shower at heterosexuality, why would that sort of image be appropriate at homosexuality? Surely there are images out there that illustrate homosexuality just as well without vaguely hinting that homosexual relationships are largely about sex- which is the vibe I got from that image.
I'm sorry if you feel that I'm being paranoid or not assuming good faith, but I feel that my message was really quite neutral. In fact, the entire thing was phrased as a question.
L'Aquatique[talk] 07:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Everybody's friends again, and I don't want to stir the pot, but I have to say that your edit summary did tally with my feelings. At first, I thought the added image was vandalism. Then I checked out VanTucky and saw admin and thought someone had hacked his account, so I emailed him (as his page suggested). At any rate, L'A., I took your "oh please" to be in a lighthearted, Joan Rivers-ish vein, and immediately regretted spending all that time explaining why I was about to revert when you summed it up so concisely! (Incidentally, either VanTucky didn't read my lengthy explanation or he didn't agree: the people in the image are not "obviously homosexuals"). Rivertorch (talk) 18:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes,I'm glad it's all resolved. Frankly, I got some bad feelings from the whole ordeal... it just seems like I was fairly kind about the whole ordeal- with the exception of the edit summary in question- which is difficult for me because I'm not known for mincing words or pulling punches, and I kinda got smacked in the face. I guess I'm just happy he wasn't really hacked and I didn't have to deal with it. L'Aquatique[talk] 18:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:ACC

You have been approved to use the ACC account creation interface. Remember to use it often to help keep the backlog away! --FastLizard4 (Talk•Index•Sign) 21:43, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks- I'll hop to it right away. This should mesh nicely with my WP:ACCESS work. :) L'Aquatique[talk] 21:46, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Heyy

Thanks for watching over me!And for the compliment! have a great day! Mr. GreenHit Me UpUserboxes 15:29, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey, no problem, man. If you ever need anything, just pop me a message here or via e-mail. L'Aquatique[talk] 19:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Replied over there...

Just saw you register the new account, and, I've approved your account. Thanks, for being patient with our work-in-progress :) SQLQuery me! 04:25, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: your idea for the references section

{originally posted at Graham's talk page)
Hey, I hope this finds you well-
 As you most likely already know, there has been ongoing discussion about the formatting issues surrounding the references sections in articles. Because the fonts are so small that they're borderline-illegible, it's making it difficult for folks to properly read them without some serious squinting action. Frankly, it's a headache in more ways than one. However, we have been told that the reason they are like that in the first place is because some articles (particularly the science ones) have massive amounts of references and if the font size wasn't so small, the pages would be ridiculously long.
 So, I've been fiddling around with different solutions (see WP:VPP#Small fonts, and the idea that I've finally settled on is to use a bit of css code to place the references section in a scrollbox. I think it looks really great, and it doesn't have some of the problems I was dealing with when I was trying to use {{hidden}}. I'm especially happy that, unlike with {{hidden}} you can jump directly from an inline reference marker to that individual reference without having to do any extra scrolling. Or at least, that's the case when browsing wikipedia normally. I strongly believe that this will work with screen readers too, but I want to be sure before I go any farther.
 What I'd appreciate if you did, if you have some extra time and don't mind being my guinea pig, is to go to my test page (User:L'Aquatique/Template Box) and click on the first inline citation you find, then let me know if it works properly. Just as fair warning, the test page is a copy of String theory- the first article I thought of when I went to go find something with lots of refs. However, you shouldn't have to wade through too mu physics gobbledegook to find a reference.
 Thanks so much for your time, hopefully this won't take up too much of it. You can reply here or on my talk page, but if you do reply here please place the {{talkback}} on my talk page as I'm a bit of a space cadet and would probably forget to watch this page. You don't have to reply with mind-blowing super-hero speed like in the past, although you won't find me complaining if you do. *grin*. Thanks again and happy, uh, Wednesday...
 L'Aquatique[talk] 22:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I have no problems with it. I found footnote 7 randomly and pressed enter on it, and was taken to note 7 in the references section as expected. I tried it a few more times on other footnotes and it worked properly. The only thing is ... 31 refs really isn't that much. Israel has 244 refs and Manhattan has 212 - I'm trying to figure out why I've had to fix it twice. Does your idea still work if reflist is split into more than one column like {{reflist|2}}? Graham87 00:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if it has multicolumn support or not, it would be nice if it did but I'm not going to be upset if it doesn't. The truth is, the point of the whole thing is to render the use of multiple columns obsolete: there have been a ton of complaints about it. (If you have a high tolerance for pain, check this out: Template_talk:Reflist#Multiple_columns_deemed_bad. Reading the whole thing, at least to me, it felt like I was entering the twilight zone or something... For example, here's a little quote to cut your teeth on: "I think its arrogant to expect Wikipedia's current reflists to be completely overhauled because Safari is buggy, instead of demanding Safari fix your browser. A vocal minority is still a minority." Just plain strangeness.) Anyway, back to what I was saying, I'd like to see, if this idea goes forward, multiple columns go away and font sizes get significantly bigger. Perhaps it's a pipe dream, but it's good to know it works fine with screen readers.
Well, I'm going to go change my sample article to something with more references. Thanks so much again for your time, I'll pass the findings on to everyone else. L'Aquatique[talk] 01:37, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Update: there is support for at least up to three columns. L'Aquatique[talk] 03:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Citation

You wrote :

« She is currently studying to be a marine biologist at the University of Alaska Southeast »

So, please notice the user:Lycaon (both wikigraphist and Marine biologist). bye ^-^y 220.135.4.212 (talk) 08:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CfD nomination of Category:South Park Holiday Specials

Category:South Park Holiday Specials, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. – Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Skagway

You guys sort it out over there about what to do. I'll just sit back and laugh when you all have to re-do the changes I made that I see were already reverted. --Polaron | Talk 12:36, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

As I said, it's up to you guys at WikiProject Alaska to decide. If you look hard enough you'll find the sources. I don't work on Alaska articles so it doesn't bother me if they're out of date. --Polaron | Talk 21:59, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ads

Hi, you are doing a wonderful job with Wikipedia's ads. However, could you add the images that you used per attribution? miranda 18:15, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, maybe I'm just spacey right this minute, but I'm not sure I understand? I attribute every bit and piece that I didn't make from the ground up in the permissions section: usually it's just fonts. L'Aquatique[talk] 21:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Like with the Italian flag in this image, you need to properly attribute the person who you took the image from. I think WP:BANNER says this as well. miranda 00:47, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, I believe I've been interpreting copyright law incorrectly then. I was under the impression that, since I made it in photoshop and the ratio of the dimensions were different than in a flag, then it is my work that I am free to release under whatever license I wish. You can't copyright colors or patterns, can you? :S (I'm not being sarcastic here, by the way, I'm really a bit perplexed) L'Aquatique[talk] 03:56, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
No, not exactly. Since you used the flag of the country as an image, then you should attribute the flag. I am not talking about the colors. I am talking about the flag. I attribute each picture that I use for the banners/ads as a part of GFDL/CC licenses. miranda 04:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, I didn't use an image Imade it with shapes in PS but no point arguing semantics, especially in a "I don't make the rules I just enforce them" situation! I'll go change the italy one and I guess the Alaska one. Thanks for the heads up! L'Aquatique[talk] 22:59, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Great. Thanks for your co-operation. miranda 02:49, 31 May 2008 (UTC)