User talk:Dalbury/Archive 6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 DYK 2 FYI 3 CC licenses 4 Citing sources on plantatations 5 Fair Use Dispute 6 Duval County, Florida 7 Osceola image 8 Burt Reynolds 9 Fort Lauderdale 10 Wikiproject Miami 11 Censoring 12 Welcome to OTRS! 13 Ignore all rules 14 Boot of beer 15 Category:Settlements 16 Loxahatchee Groves, Florida 17 Mediation request 18 Pics thanks 19 Morikami 20 Request for Mediation 21 Off topic 22 Sanibel, Florida 2nd opinion 23 Reply re userfication 24 Re your Algae as Protist discussion 25 Larry Bird in Naples 26 Burt Reynolds 27 BURT 28 Map of Tampa 29 Talk:Morikami park 30 McCarthy, McCarthyism

[edit] DYK

On 5 February 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Robert King High, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Yomangani^talk 11:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FYI

See WP:ANI#Gilbert Wesley Purdy spam -- I see you've tangled with this person before. --72.149.166.221 23:41, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

You may want to go disable the vgs-wiki-watchdog.blogspot.com link in your User talk:Dalbury/Archive 2; it's been blacklisted. See m:Talk:Spam blacklist#Virtual Grub Street-related domains. Cheers! --A. B. ^(talk) 19:41, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I've disabled it, although the link does not appear to be blacklisted yet. -- Donald Albury 20:52, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CC licenses

Hi Donald. You might know this already, but there are quite a number of Creative Commons licenses, and some, like this one's, forbid noncommercial use and are not considered free enough for Wikipedia or Commons. Basically, all of the CC licenses with the non-commercial (-nc) or no-derivatives (-nd) options are not compatible; the attribution (-by) and share-alike (-sa) options are ok. There's a lot more info at Commons:Licensing, if you're interested. Best ×Meegs 13:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I am aware that there are differences. I'm not sure which case you are refering to, but I won't delete an image when the wrong reason has been used to list it for deletion. -- Donald Albury 20:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

It's no big deal. I was talking about the image whose history I linked in my first message. You correctly noted that the image was "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0", but took it off of its deletion track by incorrectly tagging it {{Cc-by-2.0}}. We don't have a tag for by-nc-sa images, because we treat them as we do all other unfree media and only allow them under a claim of fair use. I deleted it because a photo of a contemporary, accessible building does not meet criterion #1 of our fair use policy. ×Meegs 22:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree that such images need to go. I may have missed the details in this case. -- Donald Albury 22:04, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citing sources on plantatations

Note - Source is noted at article bottom as Clifton Paisley. I just added more information from his book which I had not yet read all the way through. If you see other plantations done by me in this way, I'll mention it in discussion. Noles1984 23:21, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

In-line citations (generally one per paragraph is fine) make it clear what material is supported by which reference. As soon as an article is more than a couple of paragraphs long, it becomes difficult to tell what end-of-article references cover (especially if they are books or other off-line references). When books are used as references, it is helpful to list page numbers for specific citations. I know I've been caught out when challenged for a citation for a specific statement, and couldn't remember which of the three library books I had listed as references it came from. -- Donald Albury 23:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair Use Dispute

The reasoning behind the dispute has been updated for Image:SethPubPhoto.jpg. Jheditorials 15:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)jheditorials

[edit] Duval County, Florida

Mr. Albury, my edit that was deleted was for the Duval County page, not the Jacksonville page (I have no idea where to get election results for the City of Jacksonville). I guess that the Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections, http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/, is not considered a "relible source" (despite the fact that it bases everything on government sources and is used by thousands of political professionals who pay for its premium content), so I went to the Duval County Supervisor of Elections website and confirmed that the numbers I had gotten from the Atlas for 2004 and 2000 were indeed correct. Here are the numbers for 2004: http://www.duvalelections.com/ERSummary.aspx?eid=9 and here are the ones for 2000: http://www.duvalelections.com/Election.aspx?eid=2; I included those sources in the "history" and "discussion" sections of the main article. BTW, the Duval elections website only goes back to 2000, so I *did not* change the incorrect results for prior elections (which, BTW, were input without a source by whomever it was that did so). I apologize for having previously fixed obviously incorrect (and unsourced) information without meeting with Wikipedia's "reliable sources" criteria, but I honestly did not think that the Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections would not be deemed to be "reliable." AuH2ORepublican 16:38, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Our verifiability policy requires that everything in Wikipedia be verifiable, and that reliable sources be cited when any statement is challenged. If you feel the the current election result figures are wrong you can request citations for them, or, if you have a source, change the figures AND cite your source(s) in the article. -- Donald Albury 04:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. AuH2ORepublican 15:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Osceola image

With regard to Image:OsceolaOcala.JPG, I have changed the tag from {{PD-self}} to {{statue}}, and added fair use rationale. I am also inquiring about the age of the statue, as it is possibly already in the public domain.--NeilEvans 23:18, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

The Wikipedia fair use policy states that "paintings and other works of visual art" may be used only "for critical commentary, including images illustrative of a particular technique or school." Use of an image that is under copyright for illustrating an article about the subject of the artwork does not qualify for "fair use" in Wikipedia. -- Donald Albury 04:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I have added information about the statue being erected to commemorate the event. Can the image now be used as fair use because it is illustrating part of the article?--NeilEvans 23:13, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that our 'fair use' criteria do not cover the use of the image in an article about Osceola. Specifically, the [[tl|statue}} template includes the following text:

It is believed that the use of a picture

• to illustrate the three-dimensional work of art in question,
• to discuss the artistic genre or technique of the work of art
• or to discuss the artist or the school to which the artist belongs

• on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation,

qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Any other uses of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement.

My interpretation of this text is that the image could only be used in an article about the statue, an article about the artistic genre or technique of the statue or an article about the artist or the school to which the artist belongs. More basically, fair use is justified by a critique or analysis of a piece of artwork. Using the image in an article about Osceola does not meet those criteria. Added to that, in the case of Osceola we have a number of public domain images of Osceola that we can freely use, which means there is no justification for using any 'fair use' image in the article. -- Donald Albury 23:30, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Burt Reynolds

Because you spent childhood somewhere does not mean you were born there so, unless you have something that disputes major encyclopedias such as *Georgia Encyclopedia *Encyclopedia Britannica *Encarta MSN please do not change his birth place to Lansing it is simply not true. If you research him thru all his interviews over the years he clearly says his birthplace on all these talk shows "The Carol Burnett Show" Episode #1.4 (1967) he states at the begining of the show he was born in a small town in Georgia. then on "The Merv Griffin show", he says clearly from his own mouth Waycross as he does the same on"mike douglas","tonight show with johnny carson", "dinah shore", "barbara walters" and they even had a show about him on "this is your life" here are much more links as well as the fact his birth certificate is on file with the Ware County Health Department in Waycross, Georgia. [Georgia Encyclopedia] [Georgia Monthly] [Movies @ Yahoo] [Tv.com] Answers.com [filmbug] [Celebrity] [infoplease.com] [factmonster.com] [Encarta MSN] [Encyclopedia Britannica] ~~Rogue Gremlin~~I wasn't thru adding i was still tweaking 19:50 Feb 11 2007

Please take this to Talk:Burt Reynolds, where this has all been discussed in the past. -- Donald Albury 23:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Please do not change it back to that cause it is an insult to the man himself, plus i already had all of this in his discussions with all the links provided as well as adding these links to his external links before you went in today and changed it back. But yes i will be glad to move it there as long as you read the discussions all the discussions there before just going in and changing things. Thanks for your time and consideration ~~ Rogue_Gremlin~~ 23:50 FEb 11 2007 HAPPY BURTday to BURT

Here are even a few more links

• Starpulse
• Hollywood.com
• E!
• TV @ Yahoo
• The Biography Channel
• Movies @ AOL
• Allmovie.com
• Movies @ MSN ~~ Rogue_Gremlin~~ 23:50 Feb 11 2007

and yea i will move this soon. thx

[edit] Fort Lauderdale

Hey Donald, Probably going to get yelled at for this edit: [1], which was done in "retaliation" for similar text at the Pompano Beach article. I'm not opposed to mentioning Sistrunk Boulevard, but it was simply factually incorrect, considering that real estate prices in that area are still extremely bloated--for an area of "urban blight"... Bastiq▼e ^demandez 01:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproject Miami

Mr. Albury,

We can use someone with your knowledge of Miami & Miami-Dade County in Wiki Project: Miami. Would you like to join the cause?

Skillz187 20:51, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd been thinking about, have now done so. -- Donald Albury 22:23, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Censoring

Please stop. Wikipedia is not censored. Any further changes which have the effect of censoring an article, such as you did to Pearl necklace (sexuality) will be regarded as vandalism. If you continue in this manner, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 13:59, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Removing unsourced trivia from an article has absolutely nothing to do with 'censorship'. Pay more attention to my edit summary, the history of the article, and our policies. -- Donald Albury 20:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to OTRS!

Hello, congratulations on joining the OTRS volunteer corps! In case people get really upset with you and start an invasion, you get your own personal escape pod. Have fun! --Benn Newman 22:45, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! I'm trying to figure out my way around the system now. -- Donald Albury 22:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Taino Ti Donald: You might find it appropriate to keep in mind that I wrote most of that page, I will insert the appropriate references (which already are in the extensive bibliography of that page) after I submit sample chapters of my next book to the publishers today.

One of my ancestors used to sing (notice the spelling of Siboney):

Siboney con orgullo me llamo Y soy hijo del sol del del agua Con mi arco y mi linda piragua Soy feliz y no espero otro bien

Yo sufro, yo sufro, yo sufire Por volver a mi Cuba querida A Cuba, a Cuba done donde yo naci.

El Jigue 2-20-06-7208.65.188.149 17:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ignore all rules

I was kind of puzzled at your contribution on February 13th copyright problems. The Bishop Botean page wasn't going to get done (not this month at least) absent my intervention so I called up the chancellor, got permission verbally, modified the Bishop's CV page and put it up as a stub. Had I just done that, we all wouldn't have been having this conversation.

It is my further going off to the talk page and actually stating that I got permission that triggered this mess because xyzzy took exception at my own use of Wikipedia:Ignore all rules. So why is his use of the policy correct and my own one is not? Is creating a page without dotting every I or crossing every T more in line with "creating a free encyclopedia" or is killing that page because you can't be bothered to send an email or place a phone call in line with the guidelines? What does the assumption of good faith mean here, or is that also optional under Wikipedia:Ignore all rules?

The only legitimate reason not to use the text as currently formatted is a fear of lawsuit. There is no chance on God's green earth that the Romanian Catholic Diocese of Canton is going to sue over this and if anybody who would be believed by the admins would actually ask, this would become clear rather quickly. Yet nobody does and nobody gives a good reason why going through the delete process is preferrable than going through the checking process. Instead, a great deal more time is being spent on the copyvio discussion rather than actually just confirming my assertions. It's a strange psychological phenomenon.

The page will eventually be created and you can be sure that the sourcing will be impeccable but if "the whim of the admin" is the true rule for en.wikipedia then why should anybody bother? TMLutas 19:34, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

'Ignore all rules' means don't let procedural minutiae or bureaucratic red tape stop you from doing what needs to be done to improve Wikipedia. It does not mean ignoring the 'pillars' of Wikipedia, such as Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, nor does it mean cutting corners on licensing of copyright material. -- Donald Albury 20:42, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I didn't expect that "Ignore all rules" meant ignore copyright violations and have not asserted that it is so. What you have in this instance is two editors, one who is asserting that copyright permission has been granted, another baldly asserting that it has not. The former (me) is saying, "you don't believe me, go verify, here's who I talked to". The latter is saying, essentially, that the former is lying and that no verification is needed for that assertion to result in a pulled page. I don't think it's unreasonable that if you call me a liar, go check with the other party to the asserted conversation. That's just common sense and it also happens to be in the guidelines. That *nobody* who sees this has taken the time to verify things but spends *more* time than a check would have taken in finding policies to justify their gut instinct is troubling to me. TMLutas 21:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Boot of beer

I've redirected the nonsense. I see you also have had dealings with this piece. SilkTork 22:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Settlements

I am currently engaged in doing some work with this category and Category:Settlements by region. I noticed you had an interest in these categories so I thought I would give some explanation of my actions in case you were curious. I feel that official, longstanding and large communities the size of villages and above would not belong under Settlements so I have been doing some resorting. Let me know if you disagree. Regards. SilkTork 23:40, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. User Hmains is pursuing a one man campaign to impose an incorrect term on the categories in Wiki. He is clearly mistaking settlement for community. How do get him to see he is mistaken? Is there a Project working on categories with whom we could discuss the matter? Regards. SilkTork 13:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Be careful. I proposed renaming the category and got shouted down. Hmains is not the only one insisting on the use of 'settlement' for all populated places. I still want to see reliable sources for that use that are stronger than the dictionary defs. -- Donald Albury 13:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Settlements category: and any category is not the place for definitions, from whatever point of view. Look at other categories. As far as the use of 'settlements' as the collective term for all populated places: that has been agreed to by the CfD process as well as discussion in the WP policy page. It is not a private choice of you or me, regardless what we make think about it. If a different term was WP collectively agreed upon, I would then use that one. Thanks Hmains 17:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmains 17:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I do not see how consensus can ignore or override reliable sources. Saying that cities are settlements is pushing a neologism againt reliable sources. -- Donald Albury 23:17, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Discussion is now taking place at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements)#Settlements SilkTork 11:52, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Loxahatchee Groves, Florida

Palm Beach County map done, plus I have an added bonus for you:

Bastiq▼e ^demandez 22:50, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Nice! Thank you. Now I guess I have to create the article for Loxahatchee Groves. [sigh] -- Donald Albury 23:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mediation request

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Morikami Park, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

It's kind of hard to respond to a non-existant request. -- Donald Albury 00:22, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Check here. It's there, but not there. Just bizarre. What a surprise. --Ebyabe 00:43, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I still don't see it. Like I don't have enough to keep me busy. -- Donald Albury 00:48, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Found it. It's Morikami_Park/. That's what's on the mediation page. And added by Mokumbear. Though the notice was added to our pages by anonymous IP. Figures.

Ironic, I think. If he took the energy he's spending on this to, say, work more on organizing his boycott, he'd get so much more accomplished. Or maybe even try to get an interview in an area newspaper. Then, golly, there'd be a legit citation for it all. Oh, but that would make sense. ;) --Ebyabe 01:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Ah well! I'll take a look at it. -- Donald Albury 01:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's his show. I'll just wait to see if he can figure out how to fix it. -- Donald Albury 01:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

It's now at the actual link in the first message. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant 04:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pics thanks

Thanks for getting more Palm Beach historic pics. Keep up the good work, sir! :) --Ebyabe 01:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Yesterday's session didn't work out very well. I took shots of some other buildings, but they came out so poor I didn't bother to upload. The display on the camera I'm using is too faint to see when I'm outdoors, and I missed how bad they were. I also have to admit that some of these building don't really look like much. -- Donald Albury 01:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

My camera has that problem a bit, too. When it's a bright sunshine-y day, great for pictures, the display gets washed out. I'm always trying to shade it, but that only helps partly. And I know what you mean about the places. I've been through historic districts that are mostly composed of mobile homes. I'm thinking "These are historic?" Then I'll see an actual historic-type building, and it doesn't look much better.

I just finished uploading all the pics I took last weekend. Saturday I went panhandle-ey (Monticello, near Tallahassee) and worked my way back. Then Sunday I drove south to Brooksville and worked my way north. Almost got incarcerated, too, when I took pics of the Crystal River Nuclear Power Plant. You know, when a sign says "Only authorized personnel beyond this point," it's kinda a good idea to pay attention. Still, they let me keep my camera and the pics I took, since they determined I wasn't a wacko. Well, a dangerous-terrorist-type wacko, anyway. Rigth after I hit Crystal River Archaeological State Park, the last place I could get pics, 'cause it was near sundown. All-in-all, I prolly got around 200 decent pics out of the 450 or so I took. So, lots of good pics and I didn't get arrested, I'd call that a good weekend. ;) --Ebyabe 01:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Any day you don't get arrested is a good day. :-) -- Donald Albury 01:43, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Morikami

I saw you talking about morikami on AN/I. Are you from the West Palm Beach area? ⇒ SWATJester ^{On Belay!} 20:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

After further review of the dispute, would you do me the favor of keeping me informed of what's happening? I can very easily travel to Morikami and get any sources needed to prove/disprove what the other editor is inserting. I'm probably heading down there in another 2 weeks (I'm up in tallahassee at the moment) ⇒ SWATJester ^{On Belay!} 20:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Uggh, it's in mediation now? I'm sorry. Well, please let me know if it ever gets to arbitration, I'll join in as a party. There's really not much that I can do while it's in mediation though, and I'm afraid I'm probably not impartial enough for it. ⇒ SWATJester ^{On Belay!} 18:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I found the customer review here both interesting and familiar. And possibly an indication of original research? So he's not just doing it here... *sigh* --Ebyabe 19:44, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Interesting reaction to a book of about 5,000 words that is labeled 'juvenile literature'. I lost faith in bios written for young readers the time (when I was about 10) that I found one about Virginia Dare. -- Donald Albury 21:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I would be very suprised if this made it to Arbcom, but then I didn't expect a mediation request on it either. -- Donald Albury 21:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Morikami Park. For the Mediation Committee, ^demon[omg plz] This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to open new mediation cases. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

[edit] Off topic

This might seem a bit odd, but when was the last time you been down to Miami? Don't you miss it? 74.225.198.131 23:14, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I was in Coconut Grove a week ago yesterday, and while I miss the Miami that was, it has changed too much since I lived there. I don't like the traffic and the crowding. -- Donald Albury 23:22, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll agree with you. Sometimes it gets really annoying trying to make your way around the city. Did you graduate high school in here? Where do you live now? 65.9.49.101 02:31, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Graduated from North Miami in '61. I live in Palm Beach County now. -- Donald Albury 02:52, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sanibel, Florida 2nd opinion

Hi, Dalbury Not sure this addition about Sanibel-Captiva Conservation Foundation is appropriate. Looks off topic and soapish to me, but I don't want to revert without second opinion. Thanks,

Cheers, :) MikeReichold 15:35, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

That doesn't look too bad to me. Of course, it needs to cite sources, especially for the importance of the organization to the municipality of Sanibel. So, if it is de-puffed and sourced, it should be OK. -- Donald Albury 16:28, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reply re userfication

Sounds good to me, I'm working on the notability guideline cleanup and an article of my own right now, so it'll be a bit before I mess with that. I'll let you know if I start a draft, please do the same if you do! Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me Please review me!} 16:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re your Algae as Protist discussion

I was fascinated by your citation of tolweb.org. Is WikiProjectTreeofLife meant to refer to that site in some way? I had been thinking of "tree of life" as a metaphor instead. Perhaps Wikipedia taxonomies should be derived from there? Unfortunately, very few algae seem to listed there. I tried searching for some this afternoon.

Also, please forgive my ignorance on this point. I am unfamiliar with the acronym OR. What does that mean? Peter 00:39, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Tolweb.org is an interesting site, maintained by professionals in the field. It is, of course, no more authoritative than many other sources. It is trying to be comprehensive, but there are a lot of gaps in its coverage. "Tree of life" is just a metaphor used by many aources. I like the particular page I cited because it does indicate the great variety of lines and uncertainty of classification in Eukaria. Protista, to my amateur eye, looks like a grade rather than a clade, a catch-all for most single-cell (more or less) eukaryotes that have not been convincingly included in one of the major clades. I do notice that [2] lists different types of algae in Cryptomonads, Haptophytes, Red algae, Stramenopiles and Viridaeplantae. All in all, I think tolweb.com is worth looking at when considering how to classify something in a taxobox, but it is not comprehensive for all clades, and contributing editors must execise judgement.

OR is original research, as defined in our policy. -- Donald Albury 00:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Larry Bird in Naples

regarding the naples, florida article larry bird does have a residence in naples. I have personally been there and met him. he used to liv here full time and his son went to my sons school.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Parkerparker222 (talk • contribs).

But you can't add that to Wikipedia unless you can cite a reliable published source. Please see the policy at Wikipedia:Attribution. -- Donald Albury 16:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Burt Reynolds

I have moved this conversation to where it belongs, at Talk: Burt Reynolds.

Not to mention WIKI clearly states "unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately," Rogue Gremlin 04:38, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BURT

If you have admin rights they should be seriously called into question for abuse of power, for your manipulation of Burts page, By removing my validated stuff, and adding your "unsouced or poorly sourced stuff" in its place.Rogue Gremlin 04:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Map of Tampa

done. (and Hillsborough County, Plant City and Template Terrace. whew!) Bastiq▼e ^demandez 18:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Nice. Tampa has sure grown since the last time I looked. I hope that will make the crtics happy. -- Donald Albury 18:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Morikami park

More comments. Thanks -Stevertigo 04:27, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] McCarthy, McCarthyism

I am inviting all recent editors of Joseph McCarthy to comment on a current dispute. User:KarlBunker, in his stated view out of concern for WP:NPOV#Undue weight, has reverted, deleted, and selectively reinstated factually accurate sourced information that I have added. I contend he is in error. Please see the discussion at Talk:Joseph McCarthy. Thank you. Kaisershatner 17:33, 17 March 2007 (UTC)