User talk:Lucaas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


User_talk:Lucaas/archive


Contents

[edit] You win

And good luck.Dbuckner 06:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Being and Time

Lucaas, thank you for the compliment. But I feel I have to remind you of the comments I addressed to you here (and which you seem to have removed, not being in your "archive" either), in which I appealed to you to consider the possibility that your competency in scholarship and in writing may be in need of improvement. The problem is that by not recognising this and adjusting your behaviour, it is dis-spiriting to others. I unfortunately do not have the time to argue every single point you wish to bring up on a talk page, or every single edit you make to an article, when I consider that (not all, but) far too many are incorrect, ill-conceived, or poorly expressed. You just don't take enough care. Not to mention that you often give the appearance of looking for an argument. So I appreciate your wish for me to continue, but at this point I feel incapable of doing so. Perhaps at another time. Mtevfrog 07:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Here is how you can show good faith and good intentions: delete the paragraph you most recently contributed to the entry on Being and Time. And then commit to not contributing any further to the entry without seeking approval first. Mtevfrog 08:24, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] How are you?

I'm back from vacation, or forced leave. --Ludvikus 17:32, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rules on reversion

Hi Lucas. The two rules you need to look at are Wikipedia:Three-revert rule and Wikipedia:Consensus. The last is actually more helpful as it explains what is a revert and what is not. I made a 'change' (i.e. deleted the section). You made a 'revert' i.e. changed it back. Yours is thus the first revert, and presumably you can follow the logic. You can ask for a new consensus about your revert (see 'the consensus can change' in the second article). But you have to initiate this. With every kind wish. Dbuckner 13:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Schism section

I have reverted back to JJL version. If you want your version in, it is not enough to mention it on the talk page. There has to be a consensus. Got that? Dbuckner 18:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Stop squabbling, stop reverting. The section is too long for the general article. Shorten, with links to the specialized article. Rick Norwood 16:46, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Physics

Lucas, it sounds like you had some good ideas for the physics article. Please be bold and make your changes! Gnixon 21:41, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Heidegger2.jpeg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Heidegger2.jpeg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 00:57, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Starvation.jpeg)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 18:48, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Merleau2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Merleau2.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:55, 7 August 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu badali (talk) 18:55, 7 August 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Speedy deletion of Image:Derrida.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Derrida.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free image with no fair use rationale uploaded after May 4, 2006 which has been tagged as not having a rationale for more than 7 days.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (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. Skomorokh incite 00:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)