User talk:Arctic.gnome

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive
Archives
  1. April 2005 - March 2006
  2. April 2006 - January 2007

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived.


Contents

[edit] List of Quebec Premiers

Great Job of updating the list!!! You scooped me! hihihi :)


[edit] If I Had $1000000

I have reverted your edit to Barenaked Ladies as, while I agree that the song has had numerous names in text, the name of the article that is being linked to is If I Had $1000000, and it's silly to link to a redirect when one is knowledgable of the article's proper name. Thanks for being bold, though. JPG-GR 04:16, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

iTunes Originals has no standing in officiality. The titles of the tracks are written by iTunes, as songs like In The Drink are mistitled. Just like the etown recording (also on itunes) which calls Old Apartment "Where we used to live" or something. this copy of the yellow tape does not have an "a" in the title of the song. Nevertheless, this yellow tape, Gordon, and the singles for the song should be the most official titles. TheHYPO 19:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Davidpeterson-head.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Davidpeterson-head.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free 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. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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. This is an automated message from BJBot 23:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Children of the Prime Ministers of Canada

Think you can help us save this article? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Children of the Prime Ministers of Canada. Thanks! -- Earl Andrew - talk 01:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, they put Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parents of the Prime Ministers of Canada on AfD as well. -- Earl Andrew - talk 17:13, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lengths of PMs time in office

I think we might be adding them up differently. Feb 5, 2007 was his 365th day in office, but that is still not a complete year. There are 365 days in a year, but when it his 366 days, then it is a complate year, starting a new year. Feb 6, 2007 was Harper's one year in office, Feb 7 was Harper's 1 year and one day. SFrank85 23:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

The dates for the prime ministers' terms in office now don't agree: the date in the information boxes vs. the date in the articles. Examples are Trudeau (June 29 vs June 30) and Mackenzie King (Nov. 14 vs Nov. 15). If you change one date in each prime minister's article, should you not change all the dates for each article ... for consistency? Que-Can 05:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the update Arctic.gnome. I think we can agree that the page is now correct. SFrank85 21:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
I still think the days for Harper is wrong (not total days). There are 365 days in one year. Once you hit 365 days in a year, it is now a new year, but the last day of the first year. February 6 is Harper's first year, but according to this, his first year anniversary was on February 5, which is wrong. SFrank85 15:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
OK, thanks for claering it up with me. We shall use your system. SFrank85 17:35, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario leadership convention, 1914

Re the article you created called Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario leadership convention, 1914, the first Ontario Conservative leadership convention did not occur until 1920. Please see Ontario Progressive Conservative leadership conventions. Sixth Estate 07:20, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Please note there were also no leadership conventions in 1930 or 1948. Please see Ontario Progressive Conservative leadership conventions. Sixth Estate 07:30, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

And also there were no Liberal Party of Ontario leadership conventions prior to 1919, nor was there one in 1942. See Ontario Liberal leadership conventions. Sixth Estate 23:47, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Prime Minsters of Canada, departure dates

I've fixed the dates (Mackenzie to Martin), when these PM resigned & their successor's were sworn in. My source? Prime Minsters of Canada by Jim Lotz (c.1986). As for Campbell, Chretien & Martin, CBC News made it quite known, when these respective PM's resigned and their successor were sworn in (the resignation & swearing in occured on the same date; give or take a few hours). This notion that a defeated or retiring PM resigned a day before his/her successor was sworn in, is the wrong notion (the only execption were the 19th & early 20th century PM's). GoodDay 23:20, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I've added 2 more external links to List of Prime Ministers of Canada to back my edits. Furthermore, I have a 'Funk & Wagnalls' Encyclopedia set that backs my edits. Also, in 1984, 1993, 2003 & 2006, while watching CBC news (Canada's leading News channel), they distinctively announced the outgoing PM's resignation occuring earlier on the same day as the incoming PM's being sworn in. Finnaly, I think Jim Lotz did research, before he wrote his book.GoodDay 23:51, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
I removed one of the External Links (which I added, earlier), it was inconsistant (it actually had Campbell leaving office Oct 25, 1993 -Election Day). I'm signing out for the night. As we have conflicting sources, I suggest we have a Rfc for all PM of Canada pages & the List article. An 'Edit war' wouldn't be good. GoodDay 00:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello, Artic.gnome, I've just signed in. Do you think we should have an Rfc on this topic, seeing as we have conflicting sources for the dates? GoodDay 18:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. GoodDay 20:09, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Liberal Party of Ontario leadership convention, 1942

An editor has nominated Liberal Party of Ontario leadership convention, 1942, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liberal Party of Ontario leadership convention, 1942 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 15:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Liberal Party of Ontario leadership convention, 1899

An editor has nominated Liberal Party of Ontario leadership convention, 1899, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liberal Party of Ontario leadership convention, 1899 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 15:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Liberal Party of Ontario leadership convention, 1896

An editor has nominated Liberal Party of Ontario leadership convention, 1896, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liberal Party of Ontario leadership convention, 1896 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 15:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Free content on Wikipedia

Hi,

This is very late reply to what you asked two months back on Wikipedia talk:Mirrors and forks. You asked how could Wikipedia allow its content to be freely used by anyone, even to make profit for themselves. A number of people answered your query, but in the end you looked unconvinced. I chose to reply to your page itself as you might not be watching the said page till now. Hopefully in the two months, you would have understood more about our philosophy, but if you haven't here's my sincere attempt.

Wikipedia licenses its content under the GNU FDL license, which is a copyleft license. In short, this means that anyone can use the content for any purpose, provided they also license the content under GNU FDL with full text of the license, and acknowledges all the authors of the content. Full details of this can be found at Wikipedia:Copyrights. Also note that the top of the page says: "The Wikimedia Foundation does not own copyright on Wikipedia article texts and illustrations." Thus, Wikipedia is a place where you can license your contributions under the GFDL, but this doesn't make Wikipedia own the work done by you. The Wikipedia encyclopedia chooses to make the content freely available to anyone throughout the world, free from any kind of advertisements or other bounds. This moral high ground need not be taken up by anyone using GFDL content. Some may want to use the content commercially by making it a part of their own website, by selling CDs, etc. But whoever chooses to do this also understands that if s/he wants to make profit, there should be something that would distinguish him from Wikipedia. For example, if there is a Wikipedia mirror that contains lot of pop-up ads, and spam anyone who visits the site, there would be a good reason for someone to use that website rather than the plain-ol' Wikipedia. Also, making into CDs would require some effort on his own part. Add to the fact that anyone can copy his business model, so it would be difficult to operate such a business on supernormal profit. While the example I gave is good to give an understanding of how Wikipedia's content cannot be exploited beyond a certain extent, but in reality, Wikipedia did not start functioning with this hindsight. Wikipedia just wanted to make things freely available to everyone. The best way that this was possible was to use the power of the internet. The content is so free that the only thing we want to ensure is that it remains free even in the derivative works (that is why we expect our mirrors to be GFDL compliant). It is true many people who contribute to Wikipedia actually think that they still own the content. Another whooping majority thinks that the content gets owned by Wikipedia. Frankly, I believe that if everyone is made truly aware of how free we make our content (especially with regards to commercial redistribution), many contributors will stop contributing. But there are still many people (like me, of course) who believe in promoting freedom of knowledge. Thus we all contribute for the greater good of humanity (as a near perfect charity work). Looking at your userboxes, I find that your contributions are perfect charity as you release all your content to the public domain. This means that anyone can use the content originally created by you for any purpose, even without acknowledging you, and even if you wish they don't.

Hope this clarified your doubts. If you have any more outstanding queries, I will be glad to answer. — Ambuj Saxena () 12:19, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] thanks for the comments

Jeff, thanks for the comments and the welcome to wikipedia. I really have no idea how to reply to your post on my "talk" page so I figured this is the way to do it. My apologies if I am totally wrong. cheers, ewen (Emackinnon 13:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC))

[edit] (numbers)

just curious, what do the numbers in brackets on the edit history page mean?


thanks. Emackinnon 12:25, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

thanks for your help jeff, i much appreciate it. cheers, ewen. Emackinnon 21:37, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

Hi. Sorry if I seemed snappy on the Featured Topic Removal candidates in my attempt to clarify; I've been under a lot of stress lately, which is why I'm preparing for a wikibreak. — Deckiller 04:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Ralph Klein.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ralph Klein.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 48 hours after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu badali (talk) 17:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

More

The same for image:

  • Image:Pierre-Marc Johnson.jpg

--Abu badali (talk) 17:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Grant Devine portrait.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Grant Devine portrait.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jesse Viviano 19:34, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Allan Blakeney portrait.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Allan Blakeney portrait.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jesse Viviano 14:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Allan Blakeney.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Allan Blakeney.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jesse Viviano 14:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Grant Devine.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Grant Devine.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jesse Viviano 14:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Featured Topic Viability

You seem to be someone who is very involved with WP:FT. I just received my first WP:FA this week. I am attempting to understand the prospects of a WP:FTC for

Featured articleCampbell's Soup Cans
Andy Warhol {{GAnominee|2007-03-31}}
The Factory
Andy Warhol Art Authentication Board

I am guessing I would have to leave the last one out of the topic. Would I have to research The Factory to site it or can this group be nominated if Warhol gets a GAC? TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 04:29, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I am guessing you are saying if Andy Warhol is the topic The Andy Warhol Museum would need a true article and The Andy Warhol Foundation would need an article. In addition, The Factory, andAndy Warhol Art Authentication Board would need great improvement. However, Campbell's Soup Cans might make it with just the first three articles. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 14:15, 31 March 2007 (UTC)