User talk:Sketchee

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hey, I've got nothing cute to say for my message. …Oh, puppies. There, that's cute. Now leave yours.

[edit] Archive

/NovDec2004, /Jan2005, /FebMarApr2005

Contents


[edit] Hello

Hello Xevion brother -- jiy 05:42, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Web reference formatting

About the changes you made to the external links section etc. -

The link formatting results in lines such as--

van Rijen, Onno. "Opus by Shostakovich." '. . Accessed on [[]], [[]].

I'm not at all sure this was intended? ( I have accessed the page since and refreshed to see if it registered any change.) Regards! Schissel : bowl listen 18:48, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] accusations

please do not accuse wikipedia users of ad hominem attacks, especially where none exists.. it is uncivil.

thank you 71.129.2.122 23:13, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Classicalcat links

See WP:EL.

I reviewed the classicalcat link and found that:

  1. The site is commercial.
  2. There are excessive numbers of advertisements.
  3. In order to actually download and listen to the MP3s, pop-under ads are triggered.
  4. The site uses techniques to circumvent popup blockers.
  5. The site has content that duplicates what we already have at Wikipedia, except for the MP3s.
  6. The licensing status of the MP3 content is unclear. If it is a copyvio, then we should not link to it because we avoid linking to copyvio content. If it is public domain or available under a free license, we should transcode it to OGG and upload it to the commons. In neither case is the content suitable for an external link.

For these reasons I have removed the link.

The Uninvited Co., Inc. 21:38, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Then why not link directly to the appropriate third-party site that is hosting the mp3s in question? The Uninvited Co., Inc. 21:58, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] I am sending this out to wikiart folks everywhere,

so please don't feel picked on. Here's my thing. I've been watching list of sculptors recently and have been weeding out the entries in red on the theory that this is an index of sculptors in wikipedia. However I have been reluctant to remove artists that I know or discover to be real, wikipedia worthy people, so am trying to decide if I should just do a stub - maybe a lot of stubs - of these folks or leave them on the list [I HATE lists with too much red - check out the List of Frank Lloyd Wright works for example.

I checked out one, François-Joseph Duret (1804 - 1865) and discovered that there are at least two sculptors with that name, (1732 - 1816) and (1804 - 1865)- this one is the son - and both probably could comfortably be in wikipedia. I did have a rather bad moment when someone DELETED my article on Connor Barrett about an hour [maybe less] after I first posted it, on the theory that he was not wikiworthy [or something] and a lot of these fairly remote [in time and place from me] artists are a lot more obscure than Barrett. So, i would like to know that i have the support of the wikipedia art history community before doing this. Drop me a line, if you wish to sit down and be counted. Life is good, Carptrash 04:52, 4 November 2006 (UTC) PS although i do mostly American art i have contributed to lots on non-American articles including Aleijadinho, Ásmundur Sveinsson, Einar Jonsson, Gunnfrídur Jónsdóttir, Henry Moore, Ivan Meštrović, Ørnulf Bas, Rayner Hoff, and probably some others. I say this because most of the stubs I'm proposing would be Europeans.

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:UMBC_Seal.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:UMBC_Seal.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright 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. 13:21, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anderson Cooper

I'd appreciate your views on the talk page of Anderson Cooper bio article. I have added content that is sourced, verifiable, notable and not from a gossip site, but from the editorial page of the Washington Blade raising direct questions about Cooper's integrity as a journalist in response to his comments on his "personal life" (hence the section title). And an anonymous user again blanked the whole section, and a new debate is going on. I noticed you've worked on this article before. I'd really appreciate your views.NYDCSP 15:01, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:GeorgeGershwin.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:GeorgeGershwin.gif. 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 00:30, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FA Review of Charles Ives

Charles Ives has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. MrPrada 08:44, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Friends Of Shirley Partridge

Hello Sketchee. Forgive me if I am not writing this in the right place, I noticed a note you wrote on the "Friend Of Dorothy" page a while back and thought you might be a good person to lend some support to the WWII/Dorothy Parker etymology. Some friends and I tried correcting the article by noting that "Dorothy from Kansas" was not the actual source of that expression. We provided the book and documentary film "Coming Out Under Fire" as a reference, and explained about the vernacular that developed from Mrs Parkers writings during the war. However, as I'm sure you know, the "Dorothy from Kansas" theory is much more popular. I suspect this is simply because gay people developed their own theory in the absence of the actual truth, and since we do not have great access to "Gay/Lesbian" History, an alternate explanation was developed. So the problem that we're having is that as we've tried to correct the article, a small group of dedicated "editors" are trying to protect the Garland theory and relegating Dorothy Parker and WWII to second fiddle. S/He/They have now gone so far as to "protect" the page from being edited, claiming that there are countless more "references" that support the Wizard of Oz theory. The problem with this, as I see it, is that there is BOUND to me more information supporting the Wizard of Oz theory, because that is the myth that developed in the absence of the actual story. However, none of these sources explain the history of how the term was developed. In "Coming Out Under Fire" we learn that there was in fact a vernacular adopted by Gay men who used it in their communication during and after that time. So this information supercedes any "Wizard of Oz" theory, because it actually explains its actual origin. I am hoping that you may know of some reliable sources to include, and also that you will make your presence known on the discussion board there. It has become quite an uphill battle for us. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by ShirleyPartridge (talk • contribs) 08:42, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jack Crusher

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Jack Crusher, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Jack Crusher. Ejfetters 08:11, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Bowie State University Seal.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Bowie State University Seal.png. 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) 04:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ani-Monday

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Ani-Monday, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Ani-Monday. Jobjörn (talk) 22:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)