User talk:Trident13/Archives

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Praise

You did an excellent job rewriting the Rollie Free article; I touched it up a bit more, and then moved it into the place of the original. Good work. DS 22:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Rollie Free, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Cactus.man ✍ 19:12, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

No problem, it was just too interesting a fact to leave out :-) A wee dram or two sometime would go down well. !! --Cactus.man ✍ 06:39, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The "bathing suit bike" shot

Hi, I saw the discussion on the Rollie Free talk page. This is not my area, but if the Photo really is significant as one of the most famous photographs in motorcycling history, then we would have a pretty good fair use claim, as long as the article makes this point and discusses the photograph. See the {{HistoricPhoto}} template for further details of the appropriate image copyright tag. The photograph would definitely benefit the article. Hope that helps. --Cactus.man ✍ 14:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Lawrence Brough Cranwell.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Lawrence Brough Cranwell.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:05, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Johnny Mathis

good job with the edits *thumbs up* Drmagic 00:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion

Hello! I noticed that you have identified yourself as an Anglican, and so I thought that you may be interested in checking out a new WikiProject - WikiProject Anglicanism. Please consider signing up and participating in this collaborative effort to improve and expand articles related to Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion! Cheers! Fishhead64 23:55, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for reverting Elton John vandalism

Thanks! You beat me to it, always nice to see a few new faces in that area. Every little bit helps. Luna Santin 10:43, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

After so much effort has been put into the page, it such a shame some need to show their own limitations. I'm not gay, but he is a great performer! Thanks - Rgds, - Trident13 10:46, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good work cleaning up Kelsey Grammer

I had this down to do on my list of projects, but I see you and a few others have done a mighty fine job cleaning this article up. There were just too many facts that were either the deliberate work of stealth vandals or not quite right. Additionally, some very important aspects of his life were not mentioned (such as growing up in Broward County, Florida).--Hokeman 17:16, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rachel Hunter

Please do not remove content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. If you want to remove an image, please discuss on the page first. I have reverted your edits, and noted them as vandalism. Rgds, -Trident13 17:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Before I refer you through the "three revert" rule procedure, can you please read the following from the Fair Use Policy: Rule8 - Policy "The material must contribute significantly to the article (e.g. identify the subject of an article, or specifically illustrate relevant points or sections within the text) and must not serve a purely decorative purpose" How many SuperModels do you know who have posed in Playboy? If I have not heard from in the next 24Hrs, I will refer this case to through the "three revert" procedure. Rgds, - Trident13 18:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Trident13. I just removed this image from this article because it's a fair use image barely mentioned in the article's text. I believe the information "Rachel Hunter was once in a playboy cover" may be transmitted perfectly using just text. Do you really believe the cover image adds any essential information to the article? Of course, I may have missed something. Feel free to correct me in what I'm mistaken. Best regards, --Abu Badali 18:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your message - its always better to discuss these things through, and you make more friends! I believe it was one of the highest fee's ever paid for a Playboy Centrefold model - not that I am a subscriber or an expert on this matter. Let me do some more investigation on that one - I have collected some references, but not one's I am fully happy with. My point on the artciles discussion page was: "How many super models do you know who have appeared in Playboy?" which is why she was paid so much. Hence why I believe inclusion of the image, much as though I hear your "fairuse" point, is allowed under the "illustrate a specific point" clause of Point8, which the words would not fully do/some readers would not believe without pictorial back-up. I am not a fan of gratuitous nudity, and believe that as a "family"/end user un-controlled orientated use media, Wiki should minimise use of such images/publications. But I do believe in this case it is worthy/allowed inclusion in the article. Rgds, - Trident13 19:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello, again, Trident13. I'm glad we can work things out in this civil talk. I'm sorry for being laconic in my early participations to that article. I agree that being one of the top fees is worth mentionning, but as these figures are never really disclosed, I think we're going to have a really hard time to base such claims. Anyway, I still have doubts on how much information the image cover would add to such claim. As of my understanding, we claim fair use for images basically when the image content is the information being dissucussed, and not when the image is about the information being discussed. On clear case of that is the Lenna article, that is about an image from playboy and, as such, has the image as essencial information for the article. Other good cases are the magazine covers in Photo manipulation. I understand that many many Wikipedia articles fail to follow this rule... but these errors don't make a right. Of course, I may be misinterpreting the fair use guidelines. Also, I agree that the amount of nudity on this image is not going to be harmful to Wikipedia. Best regards, --Abu Badali 20:08, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wow!

Diolch yn fawr (one of the only phrases I know in Welsh)! Thank you so much for the barnstar! - Tapir Terrific 18:38, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mercedes-Benz 450SEL 6.9 FARC

Hi there—Mercedes-Benz 450SEL 6.9 is currently on the Featured Article Removal list. Attempts to improve the article since its nomination for FA Review have been insufficient, by consensus.

I note that you have contributed to the article, and I wonder whether you're able to assist at this crucial stage. It would be a pity if the article were no longer featured after all of the work that was put into having it promited. Tony 05:41, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Elton John

Thanks for that. I've filed a AIV on him. Hopefully if an admins agree with us, e'll be blocked soon. -Abstract Idiot 08:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aberthaw Cement Works

HI mate I like what you have done to Aberthaw Cement works. I live near it in Barry but I didn't really know anything about it- just started the article with my photograph. I'll get a better photo some time as I am driving past it!! Thanks. You don't live near me by any chance? Ernst Stavro Blofeld 09:41, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Trident13/VDown

Deleted, as requested.  (aeropagitica)   (talk)  22:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Thankyou!!! Rgds, --Trident13 22:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Motorcycle "Thumbs Up"

You get a "thumbs up" personal user award from me due to your contributions to motorcycle related article here on Wikipedia! -Roguegeek 18:58, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! It's a bit of a passion...! Rgds, - Trident13 20:55, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] link to pantomime

Hello, when you want to link to the article about pantomime, please do not link to pantomime, as that is a disambiguation page (which nothing should be linked to). Instead link to the one of the options found on that page such as pantomime (theatre) by writing out [[pantomime (theatre)|pantomime]] Regards, -- Jeff3000 21:25, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Jeff - appologies! It was late, I was tired - it pays to take your time. Rgds, - Trident13 08:29, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Ditto for British. In the future please link to [[United Kingdom|British]] when referring to currently living people from the UK. For people that are no longer living, check out British for the appropriate links to use. --Bobblehead 02:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks - although I normally use the country of birth if known. The pantomime advice was ultimatly very poor - there is (currently) an intercontinetal debate going on on how to interpret the word: I can't cope with people from one part of the USA arguing with other countrymen over a referenced dictionary meaning! Rgds, - Trident13 08:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Procedures?

Hi Trident13, U blessed me with a comment once, and noting yr motorcycle interest, I wondered if u could tell me, or show me link to, the procedure for removal of a "cleanup-tone" from Ducati_999 placed by unregistered user using ip address 71.234,28.219 User_talk:71.234.28.219

You have done what I/most reasonable editors would do - placed a message on their talk page. Looking at the logs, I don't think you will get too quick an answer. The next option is to place a comment on the articles talk page - see if others agree: you might want to get others you know who have an interest in that area. If you leave it for a reasonable time (depends on the article - think at least a week) then simply edit the page and remove the tag, and place an additional comment on the articles talk page that you responded to comments/had no comments, and so have removed'

Also noticed two MultiStrada stubs in Ducati....do u know merge procedure, by any chance?

Pick one page - the better named page, considering the encyclopedic context of Wiki. Take the text from the poor page, and merge it with the good page. This may mean the good text is on the badly named page, but the world ain't perfect! The issue with existing pages is that other pages link too them, so youknow have two options: (1) find all the pages that link to it, change the wiki links to the new page, delete the unwanted page; or (2) remove all the text/categories from the page, and place Redirect text on the bad page to the chosen page. Most people consequently use the second option, and taking into account that some may type in the alternate, this covers more options. The redirect text is: #REDIRECT page name - ie: #REDIRECT Royal Tunbridge Wells. For the full deletion process, covering articles/categories/personal stub pages, read: Wikipedia:Deletion process

I thought the info in Ducati a bit sketchy, so have tried to make comprehensive. I've got three stubs filling out the history (on the spot personal response to "page too big' warning", but wondered if there was a different standard approach to that? Simple! Remove some of the information to seperate pages (ie - models, history, significant occurences/periods, etc) and place wiki links in the original to those pages, named in a convention of "Original article (named relevant sub page)" - ie "Ducati (List of Models)" .

Too many questions already, but if u can offer any info on the above newbie queries it would be gratefully appreciated.Seasalt 11:47, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Happy to answer them - its always good to have a new quality editor on board who has good knowledge! Best Regards, - Trident13 19:40, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vincent - HRD

Being a V-twin nut, and noticing the Vincent references on this page, I had a look at the current Vincent page, and the history. Of course I looked at HRD as well and noted the clean-up tag on that page, and also looked at the history. I also looked at your userpage Vincent article.

I've got an edited version of the HRD page at User:Seasalt if you would like to look at it, see if you think it useable. It may be too sparse. A link could be placed to the source material on the web for the extra details..???

I don't know the protocols with editing Userpages, or whether I might be treading on toes, but if you are stalled on the copyvio editing, I offer to have a shot at it. The Vincent-HRD page, in my v-twin mind, deserves more detail in it than it has at present. Your article has most/all of the detail needed.

Only if you wish though, and if this is not crossing boundaries.Seasalt 14:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

YES - Vincent needs a much better article: its worse than awful at present! The copyvio article: it was one of my early article revamps, and I didn't know exactly what I was doing, etc. Hence, a more experienced editor comes through and rightly calls copyvio. I re-wrote the article three times, taking all the fluff/editorial out, but (according to him) its still copy vio - hence why its still sat on my user page as a stub 3months later, rather than in the article. He says I still need to take more details out, but quite how you express technical details differently is another matter - anyone any idea on how to differently express Vtwin? As the company went down some time ago, various magazines/articles/books/internet sites have the same referenced details in the same order as they are now accepted they did happen - so I can't see how you can express those differently, rather than re-writing history: which is not wikipedic. I am happy to work on a new articles for both with you - for such a great bike it desperatly needs something much better. The HRD article needs trimming back, while the Vincent article on my stub page needs a review. If those work through, then perhaps we can work on some other motorcycle/transport areas, which are all lacking here if this is an encyclopedia. Best Regards, - Trident13 14:46, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

My interpretation of this is that every sentence has to be reconstructed so that no sentence or phrase longer than three words can be found in a google search. Take a look at what I've done, and see if you agree with my interpretation, and let me know if I've misunderstood anything there.Seasalt 14:46, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Death of Otto Skorzeny

Hello Trident, What was your source for the information regarding Skorzeny's death? I am very interested in what he got up to after the war and would like to learn more. --Tascio 21:30, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Appologies - forgot to add them the first time, but I have added two of the references to the article that I used to add to it. I also think that the website here is worth a look, for a view of a fellow soldier of his character. Rgds, - Trident13 21:47, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much for this information!--Tascio 21:59, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Seasalt Vincent

User:Seasalt/Vincent

Re-written, added to...

I was surprised to find that Phil Irving could be careless with the details in his writings, and would sometimes exaggerate or simplify figures and events in his retelling of things Vincent. This makes it difficult to be certain about some finer details.

Please check to see if you disagree with anything...Seasalt 14:25, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

It is in my nature to try for the best, even if i cannot reach it, and ppls will still find things to change and debate. I had a good learning experience filling the holes in my info. Its the older bikes I'm interested in mostly, and older cars. Came here for info, and ended up contributing. I hope I have not trampled yr project and offended with my detail. Thank you for tolerating the interference.Seasalt 13:00, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Just put Vincent up. Um, delicate question....the ...er ..HRD page? Should I leave it or update it? (Did a Douglas_(motorcycles) too.) Seasalt 13:21, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject/List_of_proposed_projects#WikiProject_Motorcycles What do u think? Dumb? Seasalt 01:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Rudge-Whitworth (motorcycles) amended. Seasalt 12:48, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Football AID 8 October – 15 October

Thank you for participating in the Football AID vote this week.

Bill Shankly has been selected as this week's collaboration. Please do help in working to improve it.

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Daisy donovan.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Daisy donovan.jpg. I notice the 'image' 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. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with 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. ResurgamII 21:49, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

- Hi Trident13. Since you did not yell at me (like one person did whom I will not name) over the Fair Use Rationale, I gave you a break and added it myself. All new uploaded images which have a fair use license tag must have a fair use rationale, explaining why it is fair use and why it qualifies as fair use in the article [See here for examples]. Thanks again. ResurgamII 22:28, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Publicity stills

Thanks for your contributions to celebrity articles. However using plain publicity stills of living celebrities discourages other users from acquiring free images and so is prohibited by our policy ("An image of a living person that merely shows what they look like ... would almost certainly not be acceptable as fair use"). Fair use is a last resort for unrepeatable images that are of particular relevance to the article, such as those of historical significance. Thanks, ed g2s • talk 08:23, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I am sure I am not the first person to say this, but I am mega confused! Firstly, I don't want to break the law/rules - but as with most areas of the law, there are grey areas, which Wiki has tried hard to define clear lines for all to keep inside - I want to do that. You will note from my edit record that I upload relativly few images for that reason - I want to be clearly inside the rules on licensing. However, perhaps you can educate me here. I have tagged all of the images in question as "Promotion" (as advised by another "knowledgable" editor on this subject), but having read through the various Wiki notes, perhaps I should be tagging them as Promophoto? I have been careful to load images where used in Bio's uploaded from mainly their agents websites - which having read the rules on Wiki again, would fall inside the Promophoto tagging. So my conclusion at present, is that I am tagging these images incorrectly as Promotion as opposed to Promophoto. However, your first point is my greatest confusion at present - agree that free use would be prefered over fair use (and that if that is the case, then all these images could be tagged with "Fair use/replace with free" tags). However, the "discourage/remove/therefore to encourage" piece seems a bit too righteous? I realise this whole license tagging area is fraught with difficulty, and I am just trying to get it right - but having had previous discussions with experts on this subject, another different view is most confusing. Best Regards, - Trident13 10:33, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Basically it has been clarified what was meant by WP:FUC #1. That is images need not necessarily be existant on Wikipedia for them to be considered "available". See Wikipedia talk:Fair use#.22Repeatability.22_criterion. Obviously for dead or exceptionally reclusive celebrities this may not be the case but "An image of a living person that merely shows what they look like ... would almost certainly not be acceptable as fair use" (note that "fair use" means "acceptable to use on Wikipedia under Fair Use". Actual Fair Use can only ever be validated by a legal ruling). ed g2s • talk 11:17, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

You may also be interested in Wikipedia:Example requests for permission. ed g2s • talk 11:28, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Joe Lydon

In article on Joe you have a reference to Hull. I was trying to dab this but unsure if it should go to Hull FC or Hull KR. Can you make appropriate change to clarify?

Keith D 10:32, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nightstar (train) article

Just wanted to say well done for writing the Nightstar sleeper train article. I've been meaning to create and add to such an article for ages now and excellent that you've done it! Have slightly modified it a bit, adding wiki links and mention of the Class 92 planned usage etc but again good work. --Achmelvic 23:02, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] James Blunt

Nice clean-up of the article; I had it as a to-do, but I think you've done a better job than I would have. I see your point about the "Personal Life" section. The only concern I have is the statement that Camilla Boler was the subject of the song "You're Beautiful," and the lack of a reference for that, particularly as an interview with Boler indicates the subject was Dixie Chassay [1]. I have not found any references indicating that Boler and Blunt were in a relationship prior to the writing of that song, which seems to have occurred prior to Blunt leaving the military. Do you have any published information that would support those statements? Thanks. Risker 14:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm - one of those "fan" articles that just keeps growing, and then needs a lot of pruning. In retrospect and looking around, I agree - Boler is pretty clear the song is dedicated to her on one occasion, but about Chassay. Suggest you rewrite - Rgds, - Trident13 18:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bus manufacturers category deletion

I notice you have deleted several articles from this category recently, and added them to a new Leyland DAF category. These companies had substantial histories in their own right, and deserve to be listed in a category that has substantial collection of articles. Please don't delete this category from any more articles. Thanks! RXUYDC 20:08, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment, but I deleted them because some, as you have now re-inserted, are in three lines of the same category. I note on Leyland Trucks you have inserted again both Bus Manufacturers and Defunct Bus Manufacturers - why? They only need to go in one, the Defunct Bus Manufacturers - which I was about to insert at Leyland DAF. Please don't over categorise articles. Rgds, - Trident13 22:39, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm fine with not overcategorising articles - in that spirit, lets delete the Leyland DAF category and make it a list. As to why the articles appear in the Bus Manufacturer and Defunct Bus Manufacturer categories, I'm not the person to ask. The point of my message was to ask that you not delete articles from valid categories. - RXUYDC 02:00, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Motorcycling Wikiproject

Welcome to the Motorcycling WikiProject. Hopefully you have a good time, start many new articles and can contribute lots to the existing ones as we need that. Cheers ww2censor 21:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)