User talk:HeWhoE
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, HeWhoE, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!
chocolateboy 20:20, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Jaqueline Lovell
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Jaqueline Lovell, but we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. Perhaps you would like to rewrite the article in your own words. For more information, take a look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Happy editing! -- Chris 73 Talk 23:02, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Ted L. Nancy
Thanks for experimenting with the page Ted L. Nancy on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks.
chocolateboy 20:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image Tagging Image:Quincy 2 at Quincy CA excursion in 50s.jpg
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Quincy 2 at Quincy CA excursion in 50s.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|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 images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. chocolateboy 02:22, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ted L. Nancy
Consider the follow quotes from [1].
Nut may use Seinfeld as its bait, but Jerry is no nut himself. Even though there have been three bestsellers by the mysteriously named author "Ted L. Nancy" that played on the question of Seinfeld's involvement, I can tell you without a doubt that Jerry is no Nancy. Indeed, this column has mentioned several times over the last couple of years that the author of the best-selling Letters from a Nut books is none other than the prospective TV show's executive producer, Barry Marder.
I thought it was pretty funny when I read the wire story. Either they're in on the joke and don't want to expose it, or they really think Seinfeld is the pseudonymous author Ted L. Nancy. I can assure you he is not. But Marder, who also is famous for getting a pastrami sandwich with Seinfeld on the afternoon before Jerry's wedding to Jessica Sklar, is — and he deserves to have his own hit now. I look forward to the show next winter.
To me that sounds like the author of column (Roger Friedman) is making the assertion that Ted L. Nancy is a pseudonym of Barry Marder. What is your interpretation?
As for naming the person in the article you can do that, but the URL is there for people to check the source if they want to, so it's not an anonymous person and unverifiable. Tnikkel 07:18, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
You took the words right out of my mouth. We must have been writing at about the same time, because I wrote on your "talk page" essentially the same thing you said! Thank you, Tnikkel. Thank you for understanding me finally! Yay! I feel better now. HeWhoE 07:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- I'm glad that we've come to a resolution. In the future a better way of discussing issues would be to post your concerns to the talk page of the relevant article. It works much better then reverting pages and communicating in the edit summary like we had been doing. Tnikkel 07:28, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Understood! ;)
HeWhoE 07:41, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Gay way.ogg
Thanks for uploading Image:Gay way.ogg, but unfortunately entire songs cannot be claimed as fair use. Only short, low quality samples that illustrate their respective article can be used. U.S. copyright law states that song samples must be no longer than 30 seconds or 10% of the song, whichever is shorter. Wikipedia policy is to speedily delete copyright infringements if they were uploaded within the past 48 hours, but you are welcome to re-upload a new file that follows fair use guidelines. Thank you! ~MDD4696 05:44, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Year of the Sirius Dog.jpg listed for deletion
dbenbenn | talk 22:50, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
I have blocked you for 24 hours for this edit. dbenbenn | talk 10:17, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- It's a good thing I wasn't online for those 24 hours! Har!
[edit] Semi-automated template substitution
- This page was modified to semi-automatically substitute templates using Pathoschild's template list. //
Rory09603:42, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Charlie Chaplin in Niles Canyon
- Hi. Regarding Niles Canyon, Charlie Chaplin didn't begin his Tramp character there, but he did make a few movies there including one called "The Tramp". - Raymond Bell, 13 July, 2006
[edit] Clitoris picture
Why did you change the picture? I think the new one is vastly inferior to Saravulva or whatever it is called. --Anchoress 02:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- You're right, the new picture is much lower in resolution. I just thought it might be neat to have a picture in the clitoris entry that showed both the clitoris and the clitoral hood more clearly. HeWhoE 02:56, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, well it's not just the resolution, it's the light level and the contrast. I agree that a pic with both might be better, but only if you could actually see the anatomical parts. Anchoress 03:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- I'm gong to try changing the contrast and light level in photoshop. If it doesn't make the anatomical parts more visible, I'll scrap my edits. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. HeWhoE 03:20, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- Sounds great. Just to let you know, there are a lot of POV warriors on the Clitoris page who keep trying to get photographs removed from the article, and therefore, there are a lot of people (myself included) who view with suspicious antagonism any undocumented changes to the pics. Sorry if I seemed snarky, I didn't know your reasons for the change (the original Saravulva pic had been removed and reverted several times recently). But... it would be in your own best interests to comment on the article's talk page the reasons why you made the change and your plans to improve the picture (especially since you didn't leave an edit summary, I'm sure I'm not the only person who will be agitated by the change). --Anchoress 03:41, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads-up, Anchoress. I'll comment on the talk page as advised. HeWhoE 03:47, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- I'm gong to try changing the contrast and light level in photoshop. If it doesn't make the anatomical parts more visible, I'll scrap my edits. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. HeWhoE 03:20, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, well it's not just the resolution, it's the light level and the contrast. I agree that a pic with both might be better, but only if you could actually see the anatomical parts. Anchoress 03:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image tagging for Image:Jerry Goldsmith London 2000.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Jerry Goldsmith London 2000.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 10:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC)