User talk:Johnteslade/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Freezing / deceptive photos

Hi there, thanks for your York uni photos. I don't believe Image:Heslington hall.jpg was taken two days ago, though — it looks far too warm for what I remember of Wednesday's weather! — Matt 12:55, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Photo was taken yesterday (Thursday 23) which was fairly warm. Johnteslade 12:59, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Argh, that's the second time today I've been misled by my watch and its inaccurate date ... it really is time to fix it. Mind you, I found yesterday pretty cold too... — Matt 13:07, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)


[edit] Rowing GB Pair

Hi John,

I came across your photo of Rowing GB Pair whilst uploading a much less good image of a sculler. I thought I might nominate your photo for WP:FPC, but can you clarify the Public Domain license status by explicity stating that you are the photographer releasing this into the public domain on the image page (assuming that is correct). -- Solipsist 18:45, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

As you requested i have updated the image of the Rowing GB Pair stating i took it and have released it into the PD. Johnteslade 18:50, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
That's great. Nomination on WP:FPC is now a go. The reactions of various people on that page can be fairly unpredictable, so I have no idea whether this image will be popular or not. You are welcome to vote yourself, but I would wait a couple of days to see which way the wind is blowing. If I got the details about the rowers wrong, let me know and I will update the nomination. -- Solipsist 19:09, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Sorry, it looks like the wind is blowing in the wrong direction on WP:FPC. Once a picture gets more opposition than support, it is unusual for the tide to turn (I'll blame American bias ;-). It still has two weeks to go though. -- Solipsist 17:46, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

[edit] Error in example

Thanks for catching that. I copied over the entry from PlanetMath as part of WP:PMEX. I also notified the author on PlanetMath that it was wrong, so I'll pass along to youhis response of "Good eye! Thanks". CryptoDerk 17:03, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hi: York page

Hi John - thanks for your updates to the ever-expanding UoY category. Would you be good enough to add yourself to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedians_by_alma_mater ? Matthew Platts 14:35, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Basmala confusion

I saw on the Basmala page you added a link to Al-Tabari, which is a disambiguation page. I was wondering if you knew whether the particular Tabari in question was Ali ibn Sahl Rabban al-Tabari or Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari? freestylefrappe June 28, 2005 04:23 (UTC)

[edit] University of Warwick math building image

I'd like to discuss your reversion of the image at: Image talk:AB4BF60A89CDC058010A1B36D757323D.jpg, if you're interested. -Harmil 18:52, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

I'll back any move for deletion of unsourced images, if you want to put them up for discussion. I didn't realize just how twisted a puzzle this whole thing was... grrr. -Harmil 02:12, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Mr Olympia

Hi; sorry I forrgot to make my comments on the talk page (I've done so now). There's just far too much biased wording "huge legs", "cut to ribbons", etc. for it to be truly encyclopediaic. It almost reads like an article from Men's Health, a style that doesn't really support our ideal of a neutral point of view. --FuriousFreddy 13:32, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] regarding Abracadabra (disambiguation)

There has been a discussion, albeit brief, about the style that you altered on this disambiguation page. I'm not going to revert your changes, but I'd appreciate it if you could take a look at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(disambiguation_pages)#Piping_and_title_technical_limitations. Essentially, some wording was added to the Manual of Style that allows the piping of article links in order to support "proper formatting" of the titles. This was brought up as a consequence of a rather upset person who had done many changes along these lines for ship names that I subsequently changed to conform to the then Manual of Style suggestion. The Manual of Style was updated thereafter, though there was only a brief discussion on the Talk page. It would be useful to folks in general for you to either say a few words in that discussion at this point in support of your position and the old Manual of Style format or consider the new Manual of Style as "in force". Regards, Courtland 00:15, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../j/o/h/User_talk%7EJohnteslade_archive1_1d90.html"