User talk:Paul Carpenter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I've recently wiped this page clean because the conversation was out of date. It was only a welcome by Sam Spade anyway.

1 Picture at Religious Society of Friends
2 rv thanks
3 Woo!
4 Regarding Template:User php
5 Image Tagging Image:DSCF0792.JPG
6 Woe, o unkind world, woe everlasting!
7 Shaye JD Horwitz

[edit] Picture at Religious Society of Friends

Thanks for adding the picture of the Meeting for Business. The article needed something new and fresh. It looks great and definitely enhances the article. Logophile 00:31, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem, I really reckon the the RSoF article isn't to far from reaching featured status. Paul Carpenter 10:03, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] rv thanks

G'day Paul,

thanks for reverting vandalism to my userpage! fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 15:26, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Woo!

Finally! A wikipedian I know outside the digital world. We should do a collaborative effort for The Leaveners/QYT User:Athelek

That sounds a pretty cool idea. I might just start that article. Paul Carpenter 15:15, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

See! I told you I would, The Leaveners article is ready to start growing. Paul Carpenter 20:37, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding Template:User php

Hi Paul. Recently you added the PHP logo to the PHP userbox. Unfortunately, it is copyrighted and fair use does not cover userboxes. I listed the image for deletion, since it's a duplicate of Image:PHP-logo.png. ~MDD 46 96 20:11, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

O.k. My Bad, Paul Carpenter 22:16, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging Image:DSCF0792.JPG

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:DSCF0792.JPG. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media 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 media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media 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 media, 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. Longhair 03:47, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Woah, I uploaded that a long time ago. It was just sandboxing so delete away! Paul Carpenter 17:11, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Woe, o unkind world, woe everlasting!

Why do you hate me? :( -Silence 16:30, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to not that hatred and proposing an article for deletion are entirely different concepts. For more infomation see the articles on hatred and Listcruft. Thankyou for your interest Paul Carpenter 16:34, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Are you familiar with the discussion on Talk:List of Latin phrases? That new page was the result of months and months of disputes over how best to satisfy both sides of a very, very difficult and tricky matter of organization. It seemed there was no end in sight, no ideal way to satisfy all parties, with hundreds of hours of my work and the hopes and dreams of Latin scholars and researchers about to go down the drain, when suddenly I had the revelation of using some beautiful, beautiful Wikicode and template-dancing to maneuver a solution that would perfectly meet the hopes of everyone! That would provide, easily, comfortably, efficiently, accurately, comprehensively, and fully automatically the whole Latin phrases list in both formats: three pages (split up because of being over a hundred pages and 200k long), and now one page for those for whom length and size matter not. List of Latin phrases (full) is easily my proudest accomplishment on Wikipedia to date, the sum and encapsulation of my entire life's work. It is who I am, it is love and glory and beauty, it is mankind itself! Or at the very least, it's a useful and effective Wikipedia list for Latin-phrase searchers who don't want to have to bother hopping back and forth between different pages, but while simultaneously not screwing over those with poor connections or difficulty navigating long pages, and also avoiding the problem of having two separate lists for the same matter and having to keep them consistent and all that nastiness (since it auto-updates itself through brilliant use of templates)! It is the ideal solution. It is the cure for cancer, the bringer of world peace, the Second Coming. It's encyclopedic, thorough, informative, useful, supremely practical, and the very opposite of "listcruft".

Or anyway, it works, ne? Why delete it? :O fwaaah. -Silence 17:36, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Why delete it? Because Wikipedia is not a indiscrimate collection of infomation. I really doubt that three whole documents is going to break anyones browser. If this is your lifes work then I suggest you contact the Open University about doing something else. Paul Carpenter 17:54, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Then argue that we don't need the three lists combined on Talk:List of Latin phrases, plenty of people have requested it!! It's not like I'm the one who wanted a fused list (I'm the one who split it to begin with!), I'm just a genius who came up with an effective and beautiful compromise for both sides of a significant dispute. :F Go argue for why it's unnecessary and redundant, don't just push to delete the article right off the bat! -Silence 18:05, 26 February 2006 (UTC)