User talk:DChiuch

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Greenvale

Yeah, I live in Greenvale. I'm in uni this year, and went to Aitken College and St Carlo's. I'm also of Italian descent (like you and alot of people in Greenvale). Good to see someone else from our great suburb on this site! Cheers, Rogerthat ^Talk 08:07, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Greenvale Primary School ...

When I read the first paragraph or so about this primary school ... it seemed a little ... odd. Not like a Wikipedia article is supposed to sound like. More like the copy for a website ... and perhaps, the copy for the website itself. Could you rectify this as soon as possible, please? Or at least let me know where the material came from? --EuropracBHIT 09:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC).

Well I couldn't be bothered writing it myself, so yeah, I got it off the Greenvale Primary School website. I'm busy with articles about The Simpsons at the moment so if I do fix it up it wont be soon. --DChiuch 09:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

By the way EuropracBHIT, what is your interest in this article? Are you from Greenvale? If you are please tell me your name, because I'm from Greenvale. --DChiuch 09:41, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

No, I'm not from Greenvale! I do know someone from Greenvale (or Flowerdale) at the least. His name is George Eraclides. No, he's actually from Kinglake. All in that general area. I'm just interested in good articles in general and I do regularly check up the Melbourne articles which does include schools. I hope this doesn't come off in any way disparaging or discouraging a young user. Knowledge is the future. --EuropracBHIT 09:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC).

[edit] List of The Simpsons episodes

I've re-protected List of The Simpsons episodes. If you have any other problems, let me know. tregoweth 14:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request for edit summary

Hi. I am a bot, and I am writing to you with a request. I would like to ask you, if possible, to use edit summaries a bit more often when you contribute. The reason an edit summary is important is because it allows your fellow contributors to understand what you changed; you can think of it as the "Subject:" line in an email. For your information, your current edit summary usage is 43% for major edits and 43% for minor edits. (Based on the last 150 major and 40 minor edits in the article namespace.)

This is just a suggestion, and I hope that I did not appear impolite. You do not need to reply to this message, but if you would like to give me feedback, you can do so at the feedback page. Thank you, and happy edits, Mathbot 00:30, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your RfA

Hi Daniel, just a note regarding your request for adminship: while we think the edits you have made so far are great, and we always love to see new contributors, most people tend to feel that it's better that candidates have a little more experience before they are made admins. I don't mean to discourage you, of course (and you shouldn't take any of the comments there personally), but I would suggest that you withdraw your nomination for now, and try again in a couple of months time, when you've got a little more experience. If you have any questions about anything, feel free to leave a note on my talk page.

Also, you might like to check out the WikiProject Melbourne, where other people from Melbourne (like me) work on articles about the city. --bainer (talk) 09:19, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, thanx for the advice, I will withdraw and try again later in time. Please, if you could tell me around how long I should wait and how many edits I should have, that would be great. --DChiuch 09:26, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

FWIW, DChiuch, I'll be happy to support in 3-4 months time assuming more usage of the edit summary box and perhaps more partaking in the Wikipedia: namespace. I voted neutral for now. - Wezzo (talk) (ubx) 11:10, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Since you asked "how long I should wait and how many edits I should have", there is a page, Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Standards where various users who are active in RfA voting have posted their individual standards for voting. It is only a guideline and not official policy. But it will give you an idea about what many of us are looking for. --rogerd 14:13, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Standards is not updated. It can and does contain standards that are quite aged. Standards change over time. A more useful guide may be WP:GRFA. --Durin 13:35, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FAC - The Simpsons

Hi sorry to oppose I enjoy the Simpson as well but this article isnt ready for FAC. In the current enviroment anything that remotely has fan page connatations will be harshly critized. I suggest submitting to peer review. Good luck I've added the page to my watch list so will support its FAC nomination when its ready Gnangarra 11:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Simpsons images on your user page

Hi Daniel, you have put on your User page the images that you have uploaded to Wikipedia. While this is usually not a problem, almost all of these images are claimed as being fair use; however, according to current Wikipedia policy, fair use images can not be used on a user page (or more generally outside of the article namespace), because they should only be used to illustrate a topic related to the image. Do you think you could remove them from your page ? Also, there may be a problem with Image:Greenvale.jpg; while you tagged it as "allowed to use by anyone for any purpose", your upload summary says "free to use for non-business purposes", which is not enough to consider the image as "free" for Wikipedia. If you don't mind, I will list the image in the list of possible copyright problems for discussion. It's a pity, because the Google Maps images are really nice, but... Schutz 08:20, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

What is your take on the Simpson's images problem ? Should I remove them from your user page ? Schutz 13:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Would it be ok for me to display the images as links? If so could you tell me how to do this. --DChiuch 22:23, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Links should be ok. You just have to use a colon at the beginning of your Image tag, as in: [[:Image:Anyimageyouwant.jpg]], which will look like Image:Anyimageyouwant.jpg on your page. Schutz 09:40, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Good job; I will strike the entry on the possible copyright problems page (the question about Image:Greenvale.jpg remains, though). Schutz 09:45, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright problems with Image:Greenvale.jpg

Schutz 08:28, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Daniel, thanks for looking into this problem. However, the new "fair use" tagging does not improve the legality of the image; indeed, the tag that you use mentions that fair use applies "for identification of and critical commentary on the software in question"; however, you are not using the image to comment on Google Earth, but to illustrate your homepage (and the Greenvale article). In addition, the copyright of the Google Earth software is probably not the problem here, but rather the copyright of the photo itself. Let's see what happens on the Wikipedia:Copyright Problems page after 7 days. Schutz 13:00, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Daniel, just to let you know, if you have not noticed yet, that this image has been deleted. Schutz 19:03, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Greenvale Primary School

Hi Daniel, I have asked for the deletion of the Greenvale Primary School article; I will let you know if and when it is done (or you will probably notice it yourself).

Just one comment about the logo Image:GPS.gif. I think the fair use justification is basically correct, but you should probably make a few changes to the logo you downloaded from the school's website. First, we should stick to an unanimated, fixed, logo. In addition, we should use with a smaller resolution (we are just "citing" the logo). Can you take care of that ? Otherwise I'm happy to do it in the next few days. Best, Schutz 07:33, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

The move has been done by Harro5, and the article has been replaced by your new version; I let you look into the fair use questions; let me know if you need anything else. Schutz 09:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I have uploaded a new version of the image, as indicated above. Let me know if you have any question ! Cheers, Schutz 19:04, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] opinion

As an editor of Lists of topics, I'd like your opinion at Topics redesign. Thanks. --gatoatigrado 15:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Move of DVD MovieFactory

Hi, I've saw you moved the article from Ulead DVD MovieFactory to DVD MovieFactory and say it's a more proper name in the edit summery. However, I think Ulead DVD MovieFactory is more proper for it's been used by Ulead Systems officially. Would you mind if it's been moved back? Thanks for your time for reading my opinion.--H.T. Chien / 眼鏡虎 (Discuss|Contributions) 22:15, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Well I'm not quite sure if we should have the company name there or not. Programs such as Microsoft Office do, but there are some which don't, such as Microsoft Office Live. I've checked on Wikipedia:Naming conventions and there doesn't seem to be a specific rule on this situation. I think we should ask on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions and see what other people think.