User talk:Driller thriller
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting -- ~~~~ at the end.
Start a new talk topic.
[edit] Adulation
I love you —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alzclarke (talk • contribs).
- Please sign your posts. Many people love me, it's difficult to keep track of just who declares their fervent admiration for me without a signature. Driller thriller 01:42, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Saitou Rokuu
"There's something evil about several people holding mirrors. It's not that it exposes evil; rather, it creates evil." Saito Ryokuu 62.56.23.122 18:36, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 01:52, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ultimate Force
I noticed your recent edit to the above page. May I refer you to http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/showthread.php?t=374709. You may also like to phone/email ITV and they will also confirm they have no further plans to air the series with you. Unlike Series 3, listings such as the RadioTimes and ITV's own website had scheduled Ultimate Force for last Saturday. If you are happy, please reinstate my amendment or at least remove "currently running"; either way, Series 4 has been postponed until further notice. I was only acting on information provided to me by ITV. Feenix(talk • email) 18:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply. I have posted the second reply I was sent from ITV (deleted the first one) on the discussion page of Ultimate Force for reference. Feenix(talk • email) 18:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Wikiproject Horror/Collaboration of the month
Hi! I noticed your name on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Horror membership list and am writing to all members who have not voted for the Collaboration of the month. Today is the designated selection day to choose the collaboration, but we currently have a tie between the two articles receiving the most votes, John Carpenter and Dario Argento. I am hoping to remedy this by drumming up a few more votes. Note that by voting for any nominated article (not limited to these two) you are indicating your "commitment to support and aid in collaborating on that specific article if it is chosen," so please feel absolutely free to ignore this message if for any reason you don't wish or would not be able to participate.--Fuhghettaboutit 22:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Images on User page
Please see Wikipedia:Fair_use#Policy #9 and remove fair use images from Your user page. Thanks. feydey 15:49, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
- Whoops, cheers, didn't know. Thanks for the heads up. Driller thriller 15:52, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Controversial tags
Jeremy Clarkson was the subject of an edit war between User:Pigsonthewing and other editors, hence the controversial tag. As for my RfA, see the notice on my talk page.
Thanks for the advice, though. It was helpful. --Sunholm(talk) 16:38, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Message
See the top of my talk page, for info about my RFA. --Sunholm(talk) 16:52, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Yvonne Ridley vandalism in progress
I'm about to report Adeladel for violation of the more than three-revert rule. You're on your third revert also, so I recommend not doing any further reversions for another 24 hours or until we get some moderation over this matter. Peter G Werner 17:38, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- I've reported it [here]. Your last edit seems to have stayed, though. Peter G Werner 17:56, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
In case you're interested, I just made a new userbox. Peter G Werner 03:37, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
{{User AccusedZionist}}
 |
This user is frequently accused of being a Zionist. |
[edit] WP:Lon
Hi - I noticed you've made quite a few edits recently adding {{WPLondon}} to relevant pages. It's much appreciated, and perhaps you may consider signing up to the WikiProject and getting involved in some of the other tasks we are currently undertaking. In particular, our two "major tasks" at the moment will require an incredible number of manhours so all the help we can get is needed! Oh yeah, you also get to use the shiny {{User WPLondon}} userbox! DJR (talk) 16:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Neutral zone problem
Thanks for fixing that! I was at technical help asking who to refer the problem to when I discovered you had fixed it. It really confused me. It was a question of redirects? KarenAnn 17:45, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use
All uses of a copyrighted image need a detailed fair-use rationale provided for their use. Additionally, magazine covers can only be used to depict the specific issue in question, not to generally depict the magazine as a whole. --Yamla 18:45, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
- I added the image earlier because I've always thought the fair-use policy is slightly ludicrous in this regard, of all the pages this image should be used to illustrate the least controversial one ought to be that of the magazine itself. I was intending to add information about this issue anyway, and have done so, but I don't believe it should be necessary. Driller thriller 00:56, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
Thanks for sorting out the track listing for Frank 'Devil's Got Youre Gold' album-I started the article but my computer started playing up, anyways thanks for sorting it out. Jamus X.
[edit] Images
Please be careful when uploading image that have the same name. I noticed that when you uploaded the Image:Prospect.jpg, you saved over an existing image with that name. That then screws up the picture in whatever article or articles it was in. In the future, please be more careful. Thanks.--Gephart 20:43, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Thriller, sorry for the late response, i have been out of town for the past week and unable to check my computer. First off, let me apologize if my comments came off as curt, that was not my intention by any means. However, the image i was referring to in my previous message was an image attached to the page Prospect Park, Minneapolis. If you check the history of the article, notably this link [1], you will see that an image named Prospect.jpg was uploaded. The image has since been replaced on the main page so it no longer matters that the new image has the same name. I was just simply trying to make you aware of the problems that can occur when this happens. Anyways, sorry again for the delay in responding and if i came off as brash in my last comment. Take care!--Gephart 15:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Tzameti
apple.com/trailers and others list the title as 13 Tzameti. As you created the redirect, I thought I'd ask you before proposing a move. savidan(talk) (e@) 20:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Paglia
Thank you for your suggestion regarding Camille Paglia! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. — goethean ॐ 22:05, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WPBio
Hi. We've renamed the importance= parameter to priority=. You don't need to change any you've already done, but please use the new version from now onwards :) Thanks very much, no reply needed. --kingboyk 10:41, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ellen Page
Thank you for re-adding the picture. She is so cute in it! 62.64.239.236 17:14, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
- That's a pleasure. It was removed on the grounds that it illustrated a character she played and not her, but that's just silly so I put it back. Driller thriller 20:59, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] RESPECT coalition politicians
_ _ You wrote:
- I went through reverting your edits removing these activists and candidates and the like from this category. I've added a reason on the category talk page but I thought I'd leave a personal message here to let you know in case you don't watch these pages. Briefly, these people are politicians, whether they've achieved office or not - one of them is a sitting councillor by the way, I assume his removal was a mistake - Wikipedia's definitions must be the point of reference for this, however failing to class these people as politicians is also massively counter-intuitive. Sorry to be a stickler for this, mate. Driller thriller 22:29, 12 October 2006 (UTC) P.S. What's with the dummy edits?
_ _ The dummy edits are a remedy for misleading summaries, my own in this case. I added blanks at the ends of lines, creating a new revision without changing the renderings. My concern was that i had referred to the Cat rather than the Cat's talk page. (Oh, i see from its talk page that you found it, so i wasted time digging its title up.)
_ _ I consider a councilor ever elected as a Respect candidate to be a "Respect politician", so i agree i probably was mistaken about the facts in the case you refer to.
_ _ Perhaps you are referring to Category:Politicians; my interpretation of it was the basis of my editing. If we can't agree on it, or on how to interpret it, perhaps we should move this discussion to Category talk:Politicians, especially since there has been no change, nor any discussion there of the wording or meaning of that off-the-top-of-my head def, since my putting it on the Cat page, nearly two years ago.
_ _ Your belief that
- failing to class these people as politicians is also massively counter-intuitive
seems completly unsupported by what my Webster's Collegiate says (the italics on "esp[ecially]" are from the original, but deserve the role of additional emphasis):
- 1. a person experienced in the art or science of government; esp: one actively engaged in conducting the business of a government.
IMO, a councilor (e.g.) is entitled to the presumption of politicianship, but the idea that 3 office holders provide politicianship by contagion to all activists of their party is absurd (unless it is propagandistic wishful thinking by its partisans). If that's a reasonable consequence of (my) definition, then you are justified in reverting my edits, but the real point is that the definition is inadequate and needs to be either reworded or hedged about with commentary that clarifies it into a reasonable and useful conception of "politician".
_ _ IMO, holders of public office, and the staffs of parties that exist because of their high probability of helping elect such officials, have something important in common, having to do with
- the scale of the resources that they may collectively have occasion to muster,
- the relative insignificance of the restraints that can be imposed from outside their sphere, and
- the restricted range from which most of their strategies usually have to come, in the current period of the society in question.
And IMO, candidates who are unlikely to become public officials, and parties unlikely to help many candidates succeed in becoming officials, have less in common with politicians (in the sense i tried to specify above) than the different important things they share both with each other and with non-party activists (political and otherwise): that is, with non-party organizations like "charities" and psychological-empowerment groups and religions, and independent individuals who commit themselves to missions of their own conceiving; what they have in common has to do with
- the scale (at least on the near term) of the resources that they can repeatedly muster,
- the need to out-think (rather than out-power) the restraints on them, and
- the relatively wide range from which activists in the same society and period can select their strategies
--Jerzy•t 05:43, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
.
[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Ellen Page.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Ellen Page.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia 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.
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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 20:35, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reverting my edits
1.Why do you need to revert my changes on Template:Girls Aloud while it have smaller height which won't make the article big and you can even hide just clicking the hide word, it is more neat and more encyclopedic with less bar lines and this is an encyclopedia there's no need of decorating the template with Red background just because the color match with Girls Aloud everything should be the same.
2.Second the article about Girls Aloud is not about pics of albums and re-release material, if you look at the featured articles like Kylie Minogue and Mariah Carey you won't see pics of all their albums instead screenshots or publicity photos. There's also no reason of bolding the years in the hit singles table.--hottie 15:50, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- First of all, I already start use edit summary a long time ago I just don't use it much (geez why does everyone look at my contributions not of all them are bad). Second, so if you know that the standard color for template is blue why did you go for Red duh because they are Girls Aloud and they are girls? Also I think black or gray is also allowed everything here is black/white color except for the links, actually the bar is just like a design IMO it's just a background I don't think it's needed so one is enough. If you compare the my version to your version mine is actually better IMO. and last you don't need to put the <br> inside the template it just make the page big if the article is small.
- Then about Girls Aloud, so if you're reason is that the purpose of the images on the page is to represent the group and the changes that it has undergone over time why did I not see any of their faces in the greatest hits cover, does it mean they are silhouttes at this moment. The screenshots also represent the group and changes that it has undergone over time--hottie 16:37, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WP:FILMS Newsletter
The November 2006 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Cbrown1023 23:08, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
