User talk:Shrumster

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Welcome!

Hello, Shrumster, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

Also, welcome to Wikipedia:WikiProject Dinosaurs! Glad to have you aboard! :) Firsfron of Ronchester 02:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Neat, thanks! I'll try to do my best! Shrumster 14:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Yes, it's me...

...and I already had an idea about who you are...well, your edits speak for themselves. Who else from our batch would be so interested with marine biology ;) How are you doing now? :) --- Tito Pao 05:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Pretty cool. :) Been obsessed with Wikipedia stuff lately, as you've already noticed. Shrumster 06:19, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] List of Pocket PC games

Hey there! I was looking at List of Pocket PC games, and think it's pretty good - I'm surprised noone created this sooner! I just added an edit to this article's talk page - then realised you're the only person who's been involved in editing it - so figured it might be worth letting you know to draw your attention and to get your thoughts :) Cralar 22:18, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I love gaming on my Pocket PC (yep, it's not even a Windows Mobile device yet. :) ). I'll be expanding the list and hopefully filling in the games' individual article pages as well. Shrumster 05:04, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Warhammer 40,000 Space Marine Vehicles

I'm very impressed with your work in splitting the article from the Imperium Vehicles, and then expanded it and significantly improving the grammar and background info. GoldDragon 22:39, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! :) I hope to be doing the same thing with the other Imperium vehicles too, and maybe hopefully the other races' stuff as well. Not too well-versed in non-Eldar xenos tech though. :) Shrumster 04:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] warcry

Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WarCry (website) (2nd nomination) Your work on the notability of WarCry looks pretty solid. If the article doesn't survive AFD, let me know on my talk page and I will open a WP:DRV case to try to have it restored. You could do it too, but I've done these before and it's important to make the case correctly, so I'd be glad to lend my experience. — coelacan talk — 22:37, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Will do! Shrumster 05:55, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
It doesn't look like that AFD is moving very quickly in your direction. Often, it's necessary to take the citations directly into the AFD so that they don't get overlooked. The notability guideline that you are working with here is WP:WEB criterion 1. I suggest that you go in there quoting it and then showing your best citations to demonstrate how the article meets the notability requirement. Like this:

WP:WEB says that "Web-specific content is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria: 1. The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself." Here Shrumster explains why these sources are non-trivial (not just blogs) and independently published (referencing the owners of the sites, CNET, etc.) These are the best sources you have, in more or less declining order of value: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] (After explanation of sources) Therefore, as these are multiple non-trivial independently published citations, WP:WEB is satisfied and notability is clearly established.

That's probably what it will take to not get your work ignored. Hope that helps. — coelacan talk — 08:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Re [6] WP:WEB criterion 3, are you sure? That applies, for instance, when a website (WarCry) publishes an original article and then another website reprints the whole article (or many pages' worth, if it's an extremely long article). I see criterion 1, but not 3. Unless I'm missing something, you might want to reclarify that in the AFD, for the sake of consistent recordkeeping. Anyway, the nominator is now supporting you. Well done! — coelacan talk — 20:26, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I could be wrong, and you might ask for clarification at Wikipedia talk:Notability (web) (detailed responses may be a week or more in coming) or just Wikipedia talk:Notability, but I have always used this as meaning full distribution. The example given in note-7, a podcast distributed by The Guardian, also suggests full distribution. If you're familiar with fair use, you might use that as a guideline: it's extremely common for small excerpts of content to show up in multiple places, so this is not an indication of notability, but if the content was too large to have qualified for fair use (ignoring the exception for criticism), then it probably satisfies criterion 3. That would mean that the distributor either had to obtain licensing or permission from the author, or that content was thoroughly criticized and so qualified for fair use without permission. Either of those cases would satisfy criterion 3 in almost anyone's book, by my expectation. If I'm just talking gibberish, expect that criterion 3 applies only on full or very large redistributions. In this case you're in solid territory with criterion 1. — coelacan talk — 20:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, I'm using USA fair use law in a very loose way here. It's not actually related to WEB criterion 3, but I see the overlap as so close that I think it provides a good map of the territory. Don't expect it to be a perfect fit though. It's really just my analogy. — coelacan talk — 21:11, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm looking into it now. DRV isn't necessarily the best route. I'll let you know when I've got one or another plan. Give me a day or two. — coelacan talk — 22:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Currently talking to the admin who closed the AFD. My hope is to get the article restored to my userspace, where we can work on it and try to establish notability more clearly and obviously. Then it can be returned to article space, but it will have to be put through AFD again at that point, to get community consensus granted. If it doesn't succeed, again, then there's nothing else to be done at that point except wait and hope that new sources of notability become available in the future. Anyway, the admin is only available for discussion on a limited basis, busy in real life. So I don't know exactly when I'll hear back. But things are moving. — coelacan talk — 02:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Okay, the admin gave the article to me. It's at User:Coelacan/Warcry for the moment. The most important thing is to work on WP:N (by WP:WEB) but a broader effort to make the article approach WP:BETTER and WP:PERFECT would be a good idea too. When we're ready to move it back to article space, it's got to go through AFD again immediately, so it will have to be crafted in such a way as to survive AFD in one shot. I'll put some work into it over the next few days. Feel free to edit it as you see fit in the meantime. — coelacan talk — 23:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] How to deal with repeat copyright violators

You posted to Wikipedia:Copyright problems asking how to deal with a user who repeatedly uploads copyrighted images and articles. Aside from marking the offending material, you can leave warning messages on their talk page, from {{uw-copyright1}}, {{uw-copyright2}},{{uw-copyright3}},{{uw-copyright4}}, increasing the warning severity if they persist. If they keep it up, report them at WP:AIV just like you would any other vandal. —Dgiest c 06:29, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! I'll try that. Shrumster 16:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Philippine Mouse Deer

Hi, can you help me concerning Pilandok. I followed the link from the history section and I think you are better in taxonomy than I am. Most Philippine-based sites and my teachers from elementary told me that it its the world's smallest hoofed animal. However, some sites including the one found in Wiki claim that the Lesser Mouse deer is the smallest. If we consider Pilandok as a subspecies of Tragulus napu (Greater Mouse deer) then Lesser Mouse deer wins. If as a separate species (Tragalus nigricans) perhaps it may have a fighting chance for the claim. But I don't know if it still a separate species.

Off topic. Does the Master degree in MSI have field work? I am contemplating on what Master's degree to pursue after graduation, MSI or NIGS. Basically just a choice between the mountains and the seas. ----Lenticel 09:04, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Booze broads and bullets...

...has been reported to WP:ANI for repeatedly removing AfD notices. And he now has a 24-hour block, by the way. --- Tito Pao 16:56, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. If there's one thing I can't stand, it's people who are more stubborn than me ;) --- Tito Pao 17:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

(reset indent) Your...ahem...best friend is now on a template-removing spree again. I've issued three warnings (but only up to level two) on his talk page, and just to be sure I"ve reported him again to WP:ANI. Let's see what comes up next =T --- Tito Pao 19:59, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:SM Megamall 01.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:SM Megamall 01.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation.

Note user-create images must be freely licensed. ed g2s • talk 20:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me! I updated the pic with the proper GFDL tag. Shrumster 06:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Goblin shark

Please do not be upset with me, you must understand that this is wikipedia the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit, I did not force the change of layout to stay for ever, I suggested it, I suggested that you change if you are unhappy, which you obviously are, lets discuss! I did not mean that since oceanic whitetip shark is FA it is correct, I meant to say that since most (all?) shark pages follows this format maybe we should use it in the goblin shark also, I just used it as an example. See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Sharks/Template_shark_article which is a template for shark articles, I can agree with you that fish pages and shark pages should be the same, but I do not think that there where a standard for fishes when the shark template was created (I can not remeber), so I guess that is why it is a missmatch between the two. In wikipedia we discuss and come to consensus, do not become upset and stop your good work just because I disagree with you, if you do that you will never be able to work in wikipedia, I am a resonable guy, lets say what you think and see if we can come to an agrement. Stefan 14:05, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Good point, no problem. :) Shrumster 17:56, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IUCN Species Survival Commission

Hi, while stub sorting, I came across IUCN Species Survival Commission, which you've been working on. Firstly, if you've included a specific stub template, it is unnecessary to also include a general stub template as well - the page will be listed on the relevant stub category list, where it is more likely to get useful attention than on the general list. Secondly, {{sectstub}} should really only be used in instances where the page as a whole has enough content, and only a section or two needs improving. Thirdly (and finally), While I commend you for taking the time to find the correct stub templates where possible, generally a page should aim to have as few as possible.

To this end I've removed all the existing stub tags, and replaced them with {{animal-stub}} and {{nonprofit-org-stub}}. Thanks for your time(!), Jeodesic 23:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dinosaurs

Hi Shrumster,

Thank you for your recent work on several dinosaur articles, including Spinosaurus. Feel free to edit other dinosaur articles as needed. Best wishes, Firsfron of Ronchester 20:54, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comments

Comments are always fun, but hey! here's an idea...let's try TALKING about the article..not commenting on the people. I don't identify with Filipinos BTW... Cali567 03:14, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tamaraw GA?

Thanks for the added stub section. I have already filled the required text there with citation. Do you think we could promote this article to GA status? The only criteria that cannot be addressed by me is the use of Images. (I also beleive my manual of style is not that impressive). I'm sorry but I really can't help in this criteria. I already asked in the tambayan and Seav but nobody has acted yet.Lenticel 03:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Impressive work! I hope I'll be that good in time. the picture is really a problem. I think there are no pictures for the baby or in that case, any open-source pictures at all. The only nice pictures that I know are from haribon and ultimateungulate and I believe both has restrictions in picture use. I did saw "kali" here [7] but I don't think this is public domain. I'm quite excited by the evolution of the article in such short notice. However I may not be able to be of help. I must finish my thesis manuscript and its corresponding poster today since my defense/poster presentation will be at wednesday, March 21 (Hey, you could visit NIMBB at that day! One of the poster people would be me). I just stop by at wikipedia every now and then to keep myself sane by focusing on other things. Maybe after I finish my requirements, I will be able to focus more energy to wikipedia. Hey, good luck to your work at MSI as well! --Lenticel 05:24, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

There is an image for the tamaraw in wiki! No wonder nobody replies to my post. Anyways, check out the image in the article (Ok, I know its not ideal but its a start)--Lenticel 03:24, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fishes

There is a new proposal on naming conventions for fish being discussed at WikiProject Fishes. As a member of said project your feedback would be appreciated at the WikiProject Fishes talk page here. Cheers, David. MidgleyDJ 07:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/h/r/User_talk%7EShrumster_e0c8.html"