User talk:Mattbuck/Archive2
 | This page 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. |
"Hi, this image was recently uploaded to commons, but it has no permission - the page states that the image is public domain, but the photo is by one D.R Gibson; who (by your username) I am assuming is not you, and without permission the image cannot be considered free. Do you have any extra information as to this image? If so, please add it on commons. Thanks. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:36, 23 June 2008 (UTC)"
Hello mattbuck. I know the author personally and he gave me verbal permission to add this image.
Hope this helps,
Aidan Croft (talk) 14:10, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
Question regarding title of McFly's new single
I edited the McFly page, as you've probably noticed. The title's meant to be "One For The Radio" but I was wondering if that was incorrect (like "Motion In The Ocean" --> "Motion in the Ocean"). It feels like it is... but I'm not 100% sure. -- Stacey talk to me 21:27, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- I was going to wait until there's more info but it looks like someone already created a page for One for the Radio and so I edited it. Would you be able to put up a "future single" template? I can never find them. Thank you! -- Stacey talk to me 15:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks XD That makes sense. -- Stacey talk to me 14:01, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
- Just realised that the album has two different release dates according to two sources :\ July 21st and August 21st. *doesn't know what to do* -- Stacey talk to me 13:52, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
- Okay...their MySpace says 21st July so I'm going with that! -- Stacey talk to me 13:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
- Just realised that the album has two different release dates according to two sources :\ July 21st and August 21st. *doesn't know what to do* -- Stacey talk to me 13:52, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks XD That makes sense. -- Stacey talk to me 14:01, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Bikini pictures
Thanks for watching over the Bikini article. I really think it will grow into a respectable article in time, with proper information, images and references. If you don't mind, and if you have the time, may be we can collaborate to that end. You know it's difficult to find people who are interested in the Bikini article beyond sizzling pictures. Aditya(talk • contribs) 04:59, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 21 | 19 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 22 | 26 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Brooklands
You said I should upload pics on commons. Should I delete these and then upload these on commons? DineshAdv (talk) 22:39, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and also, is there a way of uploading many images at once? DineshAdv (talk) 22:56, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi again, thanks for your reply, I tried to uplad a pic on commons but couldn't work out how to link words in the description to wikipedia articles and couldn't work it out. Sorry commons is too confusing for me, I'll just upload on wikipedia. DineshAdv (talk) 16:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Wow, Thanks sooo much! I did it. DineshAdv (talk) 18:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 23 | 2 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Busted
Sorry that I reverted your edit, I only took a quick glance at it and though someone was adding themselves and their mates to the members list! I should have read it properly rather than immediately reverting. Apologies! Nouse4aname (talk) 15:12, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 9, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 24 | 9 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:08, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
I've completed a review of the University of Nottingham as a good article candidate. The result was to place the nomination on hold. Please see the article's talk page for more information. Regards. Farside6 (talk) 23:25, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 23 and 26, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 25 | 23 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 26 | 26 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Radioactive\Radio:ACTIVE
All WP:MOS guidlines apply to both titles and the main body text. As an encyclopedia, correct English is used at all times above stylistic formatting. See: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(trademarks) and Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums#Capitalization in addition to previous links. Nouse4aname (talk) 17:01, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 30, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 27 | 30 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 03:39, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Scrubs
- Please discuss at Talk:Scrubs#Where should this page point? instead of any more edit warring. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:37, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Top Gear
Are you willing to reach a negotiated settlement re: the Top Gear issues, or do we carry on with the fun and games? Please see the Top Gear discussion page for more details. SabineSchmitz (talk) 18:34, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 7, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 28 | 7 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
American propaganda films
You reverted my edit to Bowling for Columbine. Please explain how this film differs from other films in the propaganda film category, and why they deserve inclusion but this does not. Better yet, do it here. -- 75.21.74.124 (talk) 13:59, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
RAS syndrome
I'm not too convinced with the two New Scientist sources you found. They don't seem to be very substantial in their coverage, so I still think RAS syndrome fails the WP:NEO guidelines for neologisms. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Chirps•Clams•Chowder) 17:23, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
- You defended the above article on the grounds that its history holds the best vandalism ever. You do get style points for that, but your education seems incomplete. --Kizor 16:59, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
The cake is a lie?
unless you know 100% that "The cake is a lie" from portal has nothing to do with the brass eye satire off a fictional drug called cake, then why change my edit which stated "possibly refering to....ect"? prove me wrong or change it back please!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.67.160.175 (talk) 14:37, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Clitoral-vaginal index
I have nominated Clitoral-vaginal index, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clitoral-vaginal index. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 08:39, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 14 and 21, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 29 | 14 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| From the editor: Transparency | ||
| WikiWorld: "Goregrind" | Dispatches: Interview with botmaster Rick Block | |
| Features and admins | Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News | |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation | ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 30 | 21 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 05:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Top Gear Police Cars
Hi, I took the photos at the British Motor Show in London over the weekend. Is there a problem with them? --Jimbo[online] 12:10, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Oh right ok. I'm not too familiar with WikiCommons. Thanks for transferring them though. Glad they could be of use. --Jimbo[online] 13:02, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Just wanted to say nice work on this one. I was actually at work and thought I remembered the picture from memory, but it seems I was thinking about Image:Microkini.jpg instead. Serves me right for trying to help out with NSFW images at W >.< --jonny-mt 15:41, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Michael Moore films as propaganda.
Hi-
A couple of weeks ago, I added the Category: American propaganda films tag to a couple of Michael Moore films, and you reverted my edit. Now, I'll certainly grant that whether his films are propaganda depends on your definition of propaganda, but my concern is that the category is not being used in a consistent fashion, and these inconsistencies can give the appearance of bias. As such, I think clearer criteria for inclusion in the category would help eliminate these inconsistencies, so I've put up a proposal at Category talk:Propaganda films. As someone who's been involved in this issue, I thought you might want to weigh in.
--skeptical scientist (talk) 20:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Reference Desk
The purpose of the reference desk is to educate users by answering questions with sensible answers that help the questioner. Deliberately misunderstanding the question and posting nonsense can be considered vandalism. I am certain that most questioners would not appreciate it if their questions were treated flippantly and responses consisted of nonsensical answers deliberately designed to confuse. Such responses do not encourage new questioners to use the service and indeed can have the effect of encouraging malicious users into also responding to genuine questions with false responses designed to deliberately confuse the questioner. This defeats the purpose of the reference desk. The contribution I removed does not help answer the question and only served to discourage anyone answering the question with a serious answer. As I am the person who asked the question I think I am in a reasonably good position in which to judge whether the response was helpful. When you first restored the response I assumed good faith and understood that you just thought it was a bit of harmless fun, but you have restored it a second time and now it appears that you have decided to embroil yourself in a conflict with me. I do not appreciate it. I would appreciate it if you did not restore the comment a third time. Jooler (talk) 14:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Ffestiniog Railway pics
I can and do confirm that the two pictures that you mention were taken by me and were correctly identified as such. I put them on the English Wiki initially for use with this article. If someone, no doubt by mistake, is claiming to be the author then they should be asked to put it right - not me, and I have no intention of doing so, since I am not an administrator. NoelWalley (talk) 12:16, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Minffordd railway station, Rhiw Goch and other FR issues
I took the pictures of Minffordd railway station in January to illustrate the article - NOT to have them removed from the article. These images were deliberately taken for the article - not to be removed. The infobox image - of the two signs was specifically created for the infobox. I am reverting. --Stewart (talk) 20:27, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- THe combination of the various images did illustrate the station. Your actions have seriously harmed the article as the various images improved the article. My de-motivation is complete and see no point in bothering adding any more FR images to Wikipedia - congratulations you have succeeded in stopping in adding any more images. Would you please delete all my Minffordd images as they are no longer being freely used and totally hidden for the casually reader. --Stewart (talk) 20:36, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- Removal of the two galleries complete with their descriptive captions added to the article. I spent a lot of time ensure that context was provided - the length of the standard guage platform and abadonment of the south end beyond the overbridge. The relative position of the subway to the narrow gauge platform and the bus stop. All this is now lost, and a textual description would not do justice. The gallery function provided an ideal vehicle to provide this context.
- Fortunately I did not go through with, but did edit the article to remove all images - as they are on commons so why bother - however I realised this was being too petty. Please reconsider and look at the totally of the two galleries (upper and lower sections) - including the captions - and you will see that you edit has resulted in a loss to the casual reader. I have no idea where you are located around the world, however think of a reader from say - North America - the images in the article would allow them to better visualise the station whilst reading the article. I repeat - look at this in the context of someone who is reading the article for education - how many of the images in commons will they actually get to - if any. Neither image left in the article does justice to context of the Minffordd complex. Nothing of the standard guage, the subway is not as obvious.
Your recent actions are make me serious consider whether it is worth my while even considering taking images and adding them to articles to improve them. I am seriously de-motivated. I was planning another photographic trip to the FR at the end of the month with the intention of fill some of the illustrative gaps in the various related articles, however I no longer see the point, as any work I will in improving the articles with images, will be undone. --Stewart (talk) 20:31, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
As an FR signalman I have a series of considerably better images than the out of date image you have uploaded - however my demotivation means I will now not be uploading them. Maybe you could find a better one of the rebuilt signalbox - see Festipedia for what the box looks like following rebuilding. --Stewart (talk) 20:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
No doubt others will fill the gaps in the FR articles I have identified, however I feel that a considerable amount of the effort that I have put in is now undone. I do not think is as petty as you are making out. A lot of my personal life is vested within the FR. I have access to a very large archive of 1950 and 1960 photographs taken by my father and they a small part of the history of a small, but significant, narrow gauge railway that I love and actively support. That support extended into Festipedia and Wikipedia. I have recently been neglecting Festipedia to improve Wikipedia FR articles. Now I see it was wasted effort.
Wikipedia has not lost me as I am an active part of WP:TIS and been working through all the Historic Scottish Railway companies. --Stewart (talk) 21:16, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- IF all you see is a few images being adding to the Minffordd article, I suggest you consider what that represents. This is not a quick geograph search for a few images that appear to fit.
- What this represents is a scouting trip to determine the strategy of what I felt was appropriate to improve the article, then there is around a day of photography (plus an abortive day when the typical welsh weather washed out my attempts), there is then around another two evenings selecting and photoshopping the relevant images. This is before anything becomes visible to Wikipedia when they are uploaded. Yes I know I do not own an article, but when you have invested several days to get what is felt to be an appropriate number of images to improve and article it is particularly galling to see them being deleted at the click of a mouse. My next targets had been Penrhyn, Rhiw Goch, Plas Private and Plas Halt in a couple of weeks time. I repeat - to me this is not petty, your actions to me have deeply upset me and makes me wonder why I bother. I started working on the FR related articles to improve, correct and enhance them. Wikipedia works by those how have the knowledge adding to them to provide a comprehensive knowledge base. If editors have their contributions removed because other do not like it (especially without any pre-discussion on the relevant article talk pages) then those with the specialist knowledge and/or have invested time in the field will not bother and Wikipedia will be poorer as a result. --Stewart (talk) 22:46, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Re: San Andreas
The discussion was on WT:VG; I'm not sure if it's been archived yet. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 12:31, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Ahahahahaha...
|
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
| What was that? "...and, of course, the washing machine"? Ahahahahaha... Aditya(talk • contribs) 12:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC) |
User talk:78.149.99.120
Just thought i'd point out that I was posting a message about vandalism to User talk:78.149.99.120 at the same time as you. I'm not big on the dealing with vandalism so if any further action needs to be taken I hope I can leave it to you. Cheers. Basement12 (talk) 21:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Festiniog Railway Images Continued
Transferred from FR Rolling Stock Talk page
- Thank you, but no thanks. Your attack, for there is no other word for it, on images and articles relating to the Festiniog has been without any consultation with the people who had been involved with the input over the past 3 years. At a point some 12 days ago 10th August infact, as can be seen on your own contribs log, you embarked on a "crusade" You have moved images to a wiki subsite, albeit under apparent policy, you have marked for deletion images that were not tagged correctly, which has caused people some speedy additional work to correct matters before they disappeared. You have added a varying number of your own pictures to this subsite, which dont "illustrate better", but make it more like your personal photo repository - and it nearly would have been, if you hadn't transferred other peoples pictures from wikipedia!. This action, in itself, leaves a lot to be desired. In your conversation with another contributor, the word demotivate has been mentioned. I can assure you, from correspondence, that he is not the only contributor who is annoyed/demotivated by your actions, and those people who contributed prior to 12 days ago, and are directly connected to the railway. You will find some will make the odd change, but nothing more. Please do not bother to try and defend your actions, as we are quite aware of them. --Keith 15:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 28, August 9, 11 and 18, 2008.
Sorry I haven't been sending this over the past few weeks. Ralbot (talk) 05:25, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 31 | 28 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 32 | 9 August 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 33 | 11 August 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 34 | 18 August 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| From the editor: Help wanted | ||
| WikiWorld: "Cashew" | Dispatches: Choosing Today's Featured Article | |
| Features and admins | Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News | |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation | ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 05:25, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, my friend
I am thinking of starting an informal collaboration drive on the Bikini page. If you are there, I can definitely have the courage to do so. Say what? Aditya(talk • contribs) 15:45, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
this link has been added twice to the above article by User:Beatlesfan456 as a reference for accusations against Ancaster Hall of allowing sexually and racially motivated attacks. This edit has been reverted once by a bot and once by me, but the user is questioning my neutrality because of my associations with the university. I would appreciate it if you kept an eye on the article (I notice you edit it heavily) and if the link is added again respond in a manner you see fit as you are a more trusted user than me even if you are still alumni. I have actually asked User:Beatlesfan456 to start a discussion on the talk page instead though, which hopefully he or she will do to prevent an edit war. Sorry if this seems like I am trying to force you to get involved, I just felt from the history page of the article you may have an interest in it Million_Moments (talk) 19:55, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Personal Attacks
Questioning the suitability of a partially literate person to edit Wikipedia, and questioning the suitability of a reference for an article on Wikipedia are much the same thing. Please consider the context of the dialogue before you make accusations. Beatlesfan456 (talk) 17:59, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 25 and September 8, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 35 | 25 August 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 36 | 8 September 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 20:48, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 15, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 37 | 15 September 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 04:56, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I've left a message on you're commons page. Regards, nat.utoronto 03:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Re: Cadwell Park
I am having troubles identifying what is what. I see two possible pit areas. One is near where the PDF map shows the start/finish line, but has no buildings. The other is just behind there with the parking. I also see several not so well maintained track sections that might need to be included. When you get up, please check to see if I am active in IRC and then bring it up. Will (Talk - contribs) 04:24, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- BTW: When make requests, you don't need to put the coordinates on my talk page. If the article on that track has decent coordinates, just give me a link to that. :D Will (Talk - contribs) 18:00, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Bristol images
Hi, Thanks for moving my Bristol images to Commons & letting me know about noticeboards - I didn't know they broke copyright.— Rod talk 06:20, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- Can I also asked about your zeal for removing galleries. I can not see that they do any harm, and help to illustrate the topic and particularly for short articles which could be expanded later then they show that images could be used within the text to illustrate particular items. I have no objection to adding a link to Commons but it does mean an extra click which I suspect many people will not follow. In addition you have added "gallery-cleanup" banners to some (eg Whitefield's Tabernacle, Kingswood and Hydraulic engine house, Bristol Harbour ) and I'm not sure from the banner what cleanup is required it just suggests moving the images to commons - which you seem to be really efficient at doing - so what are you expecting anyone else to do?— Rod talk 08:00, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- Having now looked at Wikipedia:Image use policy it doesn't say that galleries can't be used but that "In general, galleries are discouraged in main article namespace; historically, such galleries are more often deleted than kept. As a result, there are relatively few namespace galleries in the encyclopedia and good reasons must be given for creating them. The determination of whether a gallery should be incorporated into an article or created at the Commons should be discussed on the article's talk page." Therefore it might be useful if you opened a discussion on the relevant articles talk pages before removing them.— Rod talk 08:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response. I have been putting all my recent images on commons - if you look at the dates on the ones you are moving they are 2005-early 2007 before I started putting them on there. Once you've done Bristol are you going to tackle those within Wikipedia:WikiProject Somerset as this is the other area I take photos of? - although User:TimTay has already moved lots of mine within that project. We have had recent discussions re the gallery at Talk:Bath, Somerset. It does seem a complex process to move the images though, perhaps this could be simplified?.— Rod talk 14:01, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- Having now looked at Wikipedia:Image use policy it doesn't say that galleries can't be used but that "In general, galleries are discouraged in main article namespace; historically, such galleries are more often deleted than kept. As a result, there are relatively few namespace galleries in the encyclopedia and good reasons must be given for creating them. The determination of whether a gallery should be incorporated into an article or created at the Commons should be discussed on the article's talk page." Therefore it might be useful if you opened a discussion on the relevant articles talk pages before removing them.— Rod talk 08:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Why speedy (which I've removed)? It's licensed and used in an article, as are the other ones just deleted from Commmons, for that matter. Ty 03:48, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
re: Bikini
Hello. While going through the bikini article I remembered your offer to help with images. I have added an image to illustrate sling bikini or suspender bikini which is a bit taller than other variant images and in relation to the sub-section. Can you help replace it with a more horizontal image? I also have not been able to find a tankini image from the commons. Can you help to find one? The article is developing slower than expected, but hopefully it will get to become a good one if we keep working. Aditya(talk • contribs) 04:18, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Fru23
I lied, I am not from the factor, I just wanted to propose an idea using that to make it more fun for me. I admitted it on IRC later, there is no conflict of opinion. Sorry I lied about that but I only mentioned it once in a three hour chat and only in that room, not in wikimedia, enwikipedia and wikipedia. CheckUser me, I live in DC. Sorry for the trouble but I will not back down the criticism. Fru23 (talk) 00:30, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Formation section on McFly
Hey, I wrote about this on the discussion page too. It's been there for a few months but I've only just noticed (I normally just scroll down to the R:A section). Do you know if it's true? I've never heard of a lot of it before and there are no references. I'm wondering whether to revert it back to the old version. I've ask on the official boards if is true etc -- Stacey talk to me 23:22, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah..the boards said it was true and linked me to a video, which I haven't watched yet. I think I'll just reword it when I have time because it's not very good. -- Stacey talk to me 12:37, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.
Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 42 | 8 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 43 | 10 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 44 | 17 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:11, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Help needed: Bikini waxing image
I have added images of all three major varieties. But, one isn't showing, though it was taken from the commons. Could you tell what the problem is? Aditya(talk • contribs) 15:06, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
- But the first image Image:Poilspubiens.jpg still doesn't show. Aditya(talk • contribs) 16:19, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Editing Cabot Circus
Hi Matt,
Why did you undo my cabot circus alterations? I can assure you all the information I have supplied is factual and precise.
All the best,
Luke —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.11.204.52 (talk) 17:25, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Vadalism
Hi Mattbuck,
Yesterday I met you on the IRC-channel. Now I'd like to do some against the vandalism on this Wikipedia and propably you know I'n new here. Do you know internal pages where I can begin to start? Markmu06 (talk) 13:11, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
rm of MergeFrom Virgin Killer Controversy
Thanks, I missed it when doing the redirect. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 00:29, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
File:Model on Piazza Armerina.jpg - help needed
I have added this image with ample academic text and details, both on the article on Bikini and on the image page. But, I believe, the copyright tag can be improved (can't find a more suitable tag myself). It also needs to be shifted to the "Image" namespace from the "File" namespace (I don't know how). Please, help. Aditya(talk • contribs) 04:51, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, dear. This would come real handy. And, I am sure you wouldn't top looking for a free tankini image. Not yet. At least. Aditya(talk • contribs) 05:39, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
- I have added the last one of the images to the article. It looks the best, right? Aditya(talk • contribs) 01:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- WOW!!! But, I still would prefer use the best looking one, i.e. the red one. Say what? Aditya(talk • contribs) 03:29, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
- I have added the last one of the images to the article. It looks the best, right? Aditya(talk • contribs) 01:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, dear. This would come real handy. And, I am sure you wouldn't top looking for a free tankini image. Not yet. At least. Aditya(talk • contribs) 05:39, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Trikini
It certainly looks notable as an sports version of the tankini, and can be included in both subsection. Apparently even Adidas has such stuff to sell. Aditya(talk • contribs) 17:29, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
- What would be your suggestion then on this file? Mrmcdonnell (talk) 15:02, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, I changed up the tags. Mrmcdonnell (talk) 15:55, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Survey Question
Nothing bad to say, don't regard the title as bad!
The survey question is to gather data for a project. I have actually had to reply for this question many many many many times. How ever, I changed it to conform with some suggestions, and now the question is reformulated. Please see User:Deathgleaner/survey.
Deathgleaner 03:53, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
I have changed the question back from the WP question. It also seems that you are interested in this survey. If you could do me a favor, spread the word. I'm not trying to solicit you; it's totally fine if you don't take any further action. Deathgleaner 03:47, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Wrong tagging for speedy deletion
Hi Mattbuck. Thank you for your work on patrolling pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I just wanted you to inform that I declined to delete File:Pretty little girl.JPG, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion using no criterion because of the following concern: Speedy deletion is limited to strictly predefined cases and cannot be applied otherwise. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion and especially what is considered Non-criteria. In future you should rather list such files at WP:IFD. Regards SoWhy 23:35, 31 December 2008 (UTC)