User talk:JayKeaton/Archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This would be an archive (1), please don't edit it. If you must say something, go to the active talk page. Thank you JayKeaton 10:37, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to the Wikipedia!

Hello, and Welcome to the Wikipedia, JayKeaton! Here are a few perfunctory tips to hasten your acculturation into the Wikipedia experience:

• Take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial and Manual of Style.
• When you have time, please peruse The five pillars of Wikipedia, and assume good faith, but keep in mind the unique style you brought to the Wiki!
• Always be mindful of striving for NPOV, be respectful of others' POV, and remember your perspective on the meaning of neutrality is invaluable!
• If you need any help, post your question at the Help Desk.
• Explore, be bold in editing, and, above all else, have fun!

And some odds and ends: Boilerplate text, Brilliant prose, Cite your sources, Civility, Conflict resolution, How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Pages needing attention, Peer review, Policy Library, Utilities, Verifiability, Village pump, and Wikiquette; also, you can sign your name on any page by typing four tildes: ~~~~.

Best of luck, JayKeaton, and most importantly, have fun! Ombudsman 15:19, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Veruca Salt

Wasn't trying to imply you were attempting to remain anonymous, just filling in the details for the curious who wonder who posted a comment. =) Powers 18:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Closed AFD discussion

If this edit is true, I believe you commented on this AFD discussion while not logged in. That discussion is closed and has been archived, so I reverted your edit. I know it was done in good faith, so don't worry about it. You can tell if AFD discussions are closed by the background and the notice at the top of the discussion. If that anonymous edit was not you, please disregard this, and I apologize.

By the way, from that edit you seem to be under the impression that the article was deleted. The result, however, was keep, and you may view the article at Neglected_Mario_Characters. Pagrashtak 16:59, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please don't make personal attacks.

It may have been a stupid answer, but there are much more tactful, civil, and polite ways to disagree. With regards to your comments on Talk:Godwin's Law: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. "Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users." Please keep this in mind while editing. Thanks, Hbackman 05:18, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Family Guy theme misheard lyrics

Ditto that for your comment in the edit note at Family Guy Theme Song -Goldom 莨夊ｩｱ 謚慕ｨｿ 07:09, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Movie articles

I notice you've been putting up a lot of very short articles about movies. Unfortunately, these fall under speedy deletion criterion A1: "very short article providing little or no context". Reyk _YO! 04:38, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for not taking this personally. I'm sometimes more snappy than I mean to be because I'm usually in a rush. I understand the temptation of trying to cover a lot of material as fast as I can (Wikipedia is supposed to be exhaustive) but one lengthy article is better than a hundred sub-stubs. You're obviously into movies, so can I suggest that you maybe pick one movie you really like and know a lot about, and write a good, long article about that? Reyk _YO! 04:47, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

readded half those pages with enough info, going to sleep now. Do the rest when I'm not sleeping JayKeaton 09:44, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New pages creation

Hi JayKeaton,

I'm a newpage patroller. This is with regards to a number of pages you have created. There are a few guidelines I'd like to speak about here. Rather than creating a number of individual pages, with a few words in it, wikipedia would become a better collective source of information when pages are created to include substantial information on the topic. Remember, individual pages like the ones you've created are called orphan pages as they don't link to other pages in wikipedia. I can understand that you've created those pages in good faith, yet, i'd suggest you working more on providing substantial information, and cite the sources clearly, like if you have got that information from imdb, you could provide an external link as well give further information like the plot, actors and directors and whether if the actors have acted in some other movies, directors have directed other movies, so that it would be an excellent page linked to the whole movie section of the wikipedia. In the interim, the pages u've created have been deleted. Sorry abt tht.

Cheers for ur effort. - Chez ^{(Discuss / Email)} • 04:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Page moves

When you move a page you are responsible for ensuring that all incomming links are updated to point the new location. I have just spent an hour doing this following your move of c2c to c2c trains, and I am about to correct all the links I can find on the Commons. In future not doing this may result in your changes being reverted. Thryduulf 11:00, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mont-Joli Airport

What does the Yeah Yeah Yeahs have to do with that? There is nothing that I can see in the Yeah's article that would cause anyone to go to the airport article by mistake. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 15:27, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing it out. YYY is a disambiguation now. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 17:31, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Keaton

I really don't see that anything out of Zelda is so important as to have the name Keaton all to itself. People are just as likely to want Buster Keaton or Diane Keaton, aren't they? Charles Matthews 19:16, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Macromaraschino.jpg

Nice! Melchoir 11:04, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Iced coffee

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Iced coffee. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. —Vanderdecken∴∫ξφ 12:16, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Whoah, sorry about that! I'd been RC patrolling for a few hours and must've accidentally bracketed in your edits with the IP vandalism ones. Four edits within three minutes, to one sentence of text, no edit summary and repeatedly altering the Wiki syntax around a link aroused my suspicion. You're right, on second thoughts it does seem legitimate. Everyone makes mistakes. Feel free to copy it back into the article, and you might be advised that the link (http://www.nationalfoods.com.au/) is currently dead. Sorry for the inconvenience and unfortunate skirmish. —Vanderdecken∴∫ξφ 13:22, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:White-Russian-01.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:White-Russian-01.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 15:07, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for stating that you are the author of this image, you may want to remove the old licensing tag, and the license warning tag, but replace it with a license release, e.g.: {{PD-self}}, {{GFDL-self}}, or {{No rights reserved}}, to disclose how it may be used. — xaosflux ^Talk 20:56, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal attack on user page that I don't know how to fix

Your user page personally attacks the reader by saying "better than you". Please fix this. Random the Scrambled 14:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] glass

Thanks for linking the glass Ill do more bar related articles at some point Crocodilicus 21:04, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] L Ron Hubbard the writer

Scientology is a minefield for the unwary I'm afraid. You add the 'American Book Readers Assocation' quote, it comes from Hubbard's publishers and this organisation seems to only exist in their imagination. Critics have long suspected it is pure invention. While opinions differ on the merits of the book, there is no way an Encyclopedia should reprint publishers hype without qualification! To be considered for 'best' I think you'd have to win a Hugo and/or a Nebula at minimum. --Hartley Patterson 10:52, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Puppylove.gif listed for deletion

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Conan doyleGoogle.gif)

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Conan doyleGoogle.gif. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image can be used under a fair use license. 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.

If you have uploaded other fair use 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. BigDT 00:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Steve Ostrow.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Steve Ostrow.JPG. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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 files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may 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. BigDT 00:20, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smosh Edits

Thanks for helping edit Smosh, but some of the stuff that you edited needs to be fact checked and stuff. I'm going to have some of the Smosh vets check it over.--Ngard039 15:11, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Childish attempts at baiting

Four days ago I stopped responding to your childish attempts at baiting me. I thought you might have figured that out by now, but obviously not. Comments like "you lose" and "Say what you mean honey," just make you look childish. You are more than welcome to continue as you see fit, but this an +encyclopedia+ not a playground and I think you should try to act a little more grown up when writing on a talk page for an article that could potentially receive mainstream media interest. I've done my best to try to help make the David Tench article as good as possible and I'm willing to respond to on-topic comments but anything else will be ignored. Thankyou, Sarah Ewart (Talk) 02:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Archive note, User Sarah_Ewert did not respond to replies to this message, although she did react by deleting replies post haste. Reaction is better than no reaction, I always say. JayKeaton 06:20, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dante Arthurs

Your edit did not adjust the image. It added 'in handcuffs' to the image caption. See here. - Longhair 10:12, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Trip all you like. I'll still revert misleading edits. -- Longhair 10:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)