User talk:Donarreiskoffer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives for User talk:Donarreiskoffer
Before 2006-07-01

[edit] Template:Mammals & Template:Primates

I changed the large dot to a smaller one. This seems to be more visually appealing. I also removed all extinct listings from the primate template; we should include all or none, not some. However, as an experiment I created a version (check the history) that included all of the extinct families. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:59, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree the last version with the smaller dots is more visually appealing. I also think that the extinct orders clutter the template too much. So, nice work!! --Donar Reiskoffer 12:18, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RfA thanks

Samsara (talk • contribs) 21:27, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of vegetable oils

Nice catch! Thanks! Waitak 07:47, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] History of philosophy in Poland

It was very thoughtful of you to add portraits to this article. They enliven it considerably. Thanks! logologist|Talk 07:54, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, for creating this great article. --Donar Reiskoffer 08:23, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summary

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 09:27, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Omitting edit summaries is one of my fierced vices. I will try to fill them in, but I can't promise anything. --Donar Reiskoffer 09:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Belfry in Ghent

Hello,

I am from Flanders too but I'll write in English...

[1] the English version of this article explains the Mammelokkerlegend (with a picture) while the Dutch one doesn't. I tried to copy the link to the picture but I guess only articles on this Wikipedia can link to that picture. My English isn't that bad, but not good enough either to provide a decent translation of that paragraph in Dutch. Could you take a look at those problems?

By the way : thank you for providing a nice picture of the Belfry!Evilbu 14:33, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

The article looks fine now. I made a few minor changes on your input last friday. A wikilink is formed by a double square bracket, not by a single hence: [[Belfry]] forms Belfry. Anyhow if you have more questions. Feel free to ask (in English or Dutch).--Donar Reiskoffer 19:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] legibility

Please note the differences between these two formats:

The symmetries along x→x, x→π/2-x and x→ π-x for the trigonometric functions are:

The symmetries along x → x, x → π/2 − x and x → π − x for the trigonometric functions are:

In non-TeX mathematical notation, variables (but not digits and not punctuation) should be italicized, thus matching TeX style; spaces should precede and follow things like "+" and "−" and "=" and "→", and "−" should be used instead of "-". Michael Hardy 20:28, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the tips!! The result is much neater since you tweaked the layout. --Donar Reiskoffer 06:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trig identities

Genedial 05:03, 18 September 2006 (UTC)Donarreiskoffer - When you edited the Triginometric identities, I liked the way you simplified the layout, but the errors you introduced into the equations showed lack of attention to detail. Please be careful when editing mathematics!

Thank you for correcting my errors. I shall take more care next time. --Donar Reiskoffer 06:19, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gaston Geens

Good catch. I'm not sure what I thought that was, but it didn't occur to me that was his city of birth. Thanks for cleaning it up. Erechtheus 18:29, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Belgian?

Hallo,

ik heb je bijdragen opgemerkt, misschien ben je geïnteresseerd in WikiProject Belgium? Neem eens een kijkje en aarzel niet om je aan te sluiten, kost niets! :-D

Moest je in België wonen en op de hoogte willen gehouden worden, is het mss nuttig van jezelf toe te voegen aan Category:Wikipedians in Belgium.

Iemand met eveneens geen spatie in zijn nick, --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 15:00, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Dankjewel voor de uitnodiging, maar ik houd de boot nog even af. --Donar Reiskoffer 19:10, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of The World's 100 Most Powerful Women

I deleted the article for several reasons:

it was a re-creation of an article already deleted
it was a copyright violation

The latter point is most important. A list in Wikipedia should not be a wholesale copy of information from another source. This list is identical to that provided by Forbes, so it is inherently a copyright violation, and cannot be accepted (copying a list is the same as copying any other content). You may discuss the issue at Wikipedia talk:Copyrights/Can I use... to determine if there is an appropriate form to include that info. As for the other articles you cited, I'll look into them. Mind matrix 15:34, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

A quick inspection of List of billionaires (2006) and Sunday Times Rich List 2005 suggests they are not copyright violations, because a listing by accumulated wealth is not unique or original. Essentially, anything that can be quantitatively measured and ranked will rarely be considered a copyright violation. On the other hand, anything whose ranking depends on subjective or qualitative criteria will be subject to copyright issues. I hope this makes it clearer. Mind matrix 15:40, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I now understand the logic, thank you for pointing this out. But it still seems a borderline issue to me. If a magazine publishes a list of wealthy people without a numerical value per person, the list is copyrighted. If it publishes the same list with such a numerical value, being for instance a estimated guess of his wealth, that same list would no longer be copyrighted. --Donar Reiskoffer 15:52, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Not quite. The statement If a magazine publishes a list of wealthy people without a numerical value per person, the list is copyrighted isn't correct. If the list is ordered alphabetically, or by wealth (even though the value isn't stated), or by country, religion etc., then it cannot be copyrighted because such a listing isn't original. I'm not an expert in copyright law, so you may want to pursue a more detailed discussion at Wikipedia talk:Copyrights/Can I use..., though I'd be glad to elaborate on what I've said above if you'd like. Mind matrix 16:17, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Brusselsmetro.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Brusselsmetro.gif. 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:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
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. Chowbok ☠ 01:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] El Greco

Yes, compared to other FAC, this one exceeds criteria. KP Botany 20:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Patent templates

Wanted to warn you that I was about to propose your Template:CA patent Template:AU patent and Template:JP patent templates for deletion now I've created Template:Cite patent which can do exactly the same thing, but is more flexible. Hope you don't mind! GDallimore 10:07, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

no problem. In the same run you might also delete Template:EP patent and Template:EU patent. --Donar Reiskoffer 10:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Daumier

There is no point putting on infoboxes if they contain the wrong information. Daumier is about ten times more notable as a printmaker than as anything else. Have you added many infoboxes to artists? Also "Sculpture" is the "field", not "Sculpting". Johnbod 16:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree he is also a printmaker, but that doesn't mean the information I added in the infobox was wrong. --Donar Reiskoffer 20:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Really? Do you think it is improving the encyclopedia to stick in an infobox but leave out the thing he is most famous for? Arguably the two most famous things, if you include caricaturist. If so I suggest you think again. ~~I would also you if you really think that adding a black and white photo of a copy of a self-portrait of Franz Hals as part of the infobox is really an improvement? It doesn't seem so to me.~~Johnbod 21:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, to be fair I see the Hals picture was already at the top of the page, So I'll strike that bit through if I can remember how. Johnbod 23:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

In my personal opinion, an infobox works complementary to an article, and I still think I did no harm to the article. I admit however that it is still best to add a more balanced and complete description. In this light, I also added 'printmaking' to the Goya and Rembrandt infobox. --Donar Reiskoffer 07:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

The article Ball, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup.

If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.
If you do not want to receive bot-generated messages on your talk page, please consider using the nobots template on your user talk page

[edit] Location Maps

On the WikiProject Countries talk page, you had either explictly declared a general interest in the project, or had participated at a discussion that appears related to Location Maps for European countries.
New maps had been created by David Liuzzo, and are available for the countries of the European continent, and for countries of the European Union exist in two versions. From November 16, 2006 till January 31, 2007, a poll had tried to find a consensus for usage of 'old' or of which and where 'new' version maps. At its closing, 25 people had spoken in favor of either of the two presented usages of new versions but neither version had reached a consensus (12 and 13), and 18 had preferred old maps.
As this outcome cannot justify reverting of new maps that had become used for some countries, seconds before February 5, 2007 a survey started that will be closed at February 20, 2007 23:59:59. It should establish whether the new style maps may be applied as soon as some might become available for countries outside the European continent (or such to depend on future discussions), and also which new version should be applied for which countries.
Please note that since January 1, 2007 all new maps became updated by David Liuzzo (including a world locator, enlarged cut-out for small countries) and as of February 4, 2007 the restricted licence that had jeopardized their availability on Wikimedia Commons, became more free. The subsections on the talk page that had shown David Liuzzo's original maps, now show his most recent design.
Please read the discussion (also in other sections α, β, γ, δ, ε, ζ, η, θ) and in particular the arguments offered by the forementioned poll, while realizing some comments to have been made prior to updating the maps, and all prior to modifying the licences, before carefully reading the presentation of the currently open survey. You are invited to only then finally make up your mind and vote for only one option.
There mustnot be 'oppose' votes; if none of the options would be appreciated, you could vote for the option you might with some effort find least difficult to live with - rather like elections only allowing to vote for one of several candidates. Obviously, you are most welcome to leave a brief argumentation with your vote. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 7 Feb 2007 20:09 (UTC)

[edit] Artists

Artists do drawing, engineers do technical drawing or "draughting" (pronounced and usually spelt "drafting"). If an artist is described as a "draughtsman" (frankly not a very good word nowadays), it should disam link to "drawing", even if the idiot who put it in did not bother, as at Matisse.

Must you really add all these infoboxes? I have seen none that improve the appearance and content of artist's articles. The information they give should mostly be in the first sentence anyway. Btw, we need help at List of Printmakers if you fancy that. Cheers Johnbod 14:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for edit summary

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. – Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:32, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Go board

I have nominated your picture at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Go board. Would you happen to have a higher resolution variant, by any chance?--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 16:44, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I uploaded the original file at commons:Image:Go Board, Hoge Rielen, Belgium.jpg, feel free to adapt. --Donar Reiskoffer 09:45, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I like the picture a lot, particulary after editing. If we can edit the high-res version to resemble the low-res one, I think this could be Featured.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 23:14, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] update

would you mind updating the graph you did of the 10 biggest wikipedias uploaded here? It would be great if you could. Thanks in advance, Stwalkerster 17:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I uploaded an update but the image cache seems to prevent the new image to show up. If this doesn't work out I will upload it under a different name in a few days. --Donar Reiskoffer 07:50, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Belgian elections

Hi, I'm afraid that I've reverted your edit to the aforementioned template. It is one of an identical series covering most of the countries in the world (130+ so far), and is for national level elections only. I've created Template:Belgian local elections for the regional and municipals ones and replaced where appropriate. European Elections have their own template. Well done for creating those articles though! Number 57 20:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Backronym article

Hi .. just a little thing. You added "FORD" on the Backronym article's example listings. (Honest question, not rhetorical rebuke:) Did you not find it clear from the comments in the page that you should probably discuss that on the Talk page before adding that example? I've updated the comments, do they appear more clear now? Finally, would you mind removing it for now, and discussing on the talk page?

--Otheus 10:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

That must a misunderstanding: I did not add 'Ford'. I only corrected a technical error in the reference-template see: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Backronym&diff=115520372&oldid=115518961 . For my part, feel free to remove 'Ford'. --Donar Reiskoffer 12:01, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:PetersMap.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:PetersMap.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:

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

I never claimed fair use. I must admit however that the image is partially unfree, as no derivatives are allowed. I found however a possible Public Domain replacement: Image:Peters map ross merrigan 01.svg. Feel free to delete the original image. --Donar Reiskoffer 15:59, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiLinks without articles

Hello, I am puzzled by your editing to the Optical Society of America article. What is the reasoning behind encoding the journal names as links when there are no articles for them to link to? Thanks for your thoughts on this. Seeitnow 23:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I see red links as start point for writing articles. Three years ago wikipedia was full of red links which came gradually in the blue. The red links give an indication in which areas wikipedia can still expand. Therefor I tend to find that red links have their use. If you disagree however, feel free to revert my changes. --Donar Reiskoffer 18:50, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TGGWS cleanup

Thanks for you wiki-cognizant cleanup of some of the formatting, references, etc. --Skyemoor 12:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../d/o/n/User_talk%7EDonarreiskoffer_a37f.html"