User talk:Wighson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Reminders

Hello, Wighson!

[edit]

Here are some tasks you can do:


You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

  • You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
  • If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Again, welcome! - UtherSRG 00:56, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)


[edit] History of CA

Of course you're right! I know where Benicia & Vallejo are--drive thru there all the time. Guess I woke up on the wrong side of the bay this morning. BTW, you're doing a great job on the history of CA page--there's so much to say about it. Elf | Talk 04:37, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Re: note on East Prussia article

I'm too disqusted now. Wikipedia needs clear policies and courage to deal with disruptive users that can't uphold them. But there is quasi-democratic system that promotes goodwill and talking. Effect? Two warring users attracts perhaps ten others that waste their time for fixing constantly reverted and malverted articles. I'll wait. I'm nearly sure that nobody's paradigm will be irrevocably twisted by reading some nationalist rubbish in the meantime.
OK. Enough ranting. You are obviously right and I see more articles for merging - the prime example is needed merge of Regained Territories with Eastern Germany. Both articles deal with the same territory basicaly but the former from Polish and the other - from German POV. In Wikipedia, you know.
-- Forseti 12:43, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] History of CA

I responded on its talk page--hard to do a pretty layout when people are using all kinds and sizes of screens & browser settings. I like having a lot of illustrations in long articles. Do you have info on the source and/or copyright status of the images you uploaded for that article? If so, could you update the image pages so it's clear that they're not copyvio? Thanks again. Elf | Talk 01:31, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Alright, I put in more descriptions. I am stopping now, since the connection to Wiki very slow right now, and I am going to bed. --Wighson 04:19, 2004 Jul 2 (UTC)


[edit] Unverified images

Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 21:52, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

[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] History of California text

How much of the huge dollop of new text that you put into this article came directly from your cited source, (Principal source for this section: Laurence Fletcher Talbott, PhD., California in the War for Southern Independence)? How much did you rewrite? Just checking-- Elf | Talk 15:06, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your message.
I wrote it all in one sitting. I consulted the book to confirm names and dates. Nothing is quoted. The book is 235 pages, so the amount is well within fair use. The publisher is now defunct, but copies can be ordered from AbeBooks online, which is where I got mine. I confirmed much of Dr. Talbott's research for accuracy, but the fact is that little research has been done on the topic. The book is quite a find. Thus, Wikipedia's entry is now better than anything online!
I think I forgot to unclick the "This is a minor edit" box, but I don't know how to fix that after the fact.

--Wighson | Talk 00:42, 2005 Feb 5 (UTC)

You're just too good, then. Try to write it crappily next time so we know! ;-) Elf | Talk 00:46, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Wow! That's quite a compliment. Thanks, Elf.

[edit] Template User non-3

Apologies for the unsolicited advice but it strikes me that anybody using this template is probably overestimating their knowledge of the language. Respectfully, Stefán Ingi 23:11, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Darn. There goes my publishing contract! I'll have to call them.
I would rank all modern Icelanders close to a five, and technically since old languages are for reading knowledge (Egil's dead), they really ought to be a "6," since the average Icelander would likely read better than the average Norse. Wighson 00:13, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
They look much better now. Of course we will never know what Egill himself would have written if he had had access to Wikipedia. Stefán Ingi 13:10, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
While on that note, I am slightly concerned about the move you made of Egill Skallagrímsson to Egill Skallagrímssonr. Egill himself would probably have written sunR at the end in the Runic alphabet but that is a bit on the level of speculation because we don't have any texts available from him. The best and more or less the oldest manuscript we have of Egils saga is Möðruvallabók and that doesn't have the r, see e.g. [1] where the text towards the bottom right hand side, starting from the large Þ reads: "Þorólfr SG-son bioz eitt sumar..." (the character set available to me doesn't give perfect rendering of the handwritten text). But I have no strong feelings on this, so I'll leave it up to you. Stefán Ingi 16:20, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
According to at least one standard source (Cleasby), sonr is more correct. Egil, as you say would have put the 'r' on and the beautiful vellum has an abbreviation, not the full spelling. However, the 'r' makes the name a little harder to pronounce on English Wikipedia, which is why I personally prefer "Egil Skallagrimsson". I doubt the people who made Wikipedia's standard for spelling Old Norse here would object to leaving off the 'r'. Thanks once again for the stimulating discussion and for the link to the beautiful manuscript. Best wishes! Wighson 19:39, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Odin

Are you planning on doing a rewrite here? Daemon8666 17:25, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I'd love to, but it would be reverted. I for one would welcome a new hand on the article.Wighson 23:59, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm a repository of story, not language; as that seems to be where most of your disputes lie I don't know how much of a help I would be there; but I most definitely welcome the changes. Daemon8666 14:05, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Wighson, thanks for dropping your $0.02 on dab. The article needed some major revision, and it was going to take a scholar to dig him out of his trench and get it so that anyone cuold edit the article. Daemon8666 14:34, 28 February 2006 (UTC)


[edit] This and that

Thanks for your friendly message. I can assure you that you would not mistake me for a native English speaker if we met in person - my writing is better than my talking.

What I think Stefán is getting at with the ON Babel templates is that the current texts there are not very grammatical and perhaps don't quite use the right words. For one thing the language never called itself "gamalnorska" - "dönsk tunga" would probably be more appropriate.

Let the Odin thing cool down a bit and I'm sure we can find some solution everyone agrees on.

Kveðja, Haukur

Thanks! Sounds good. I'm trying hard not to laugh. It's made some entertaining conversations at work, though. I had to make a big explanation as to why I was even posting at Wikipedia. I said I was preparing research for a paper on "Patterns of Conflict and Resolution" or some such. They laughed. But when the new term comes around, I know I'll get a playful jab or two. This is why I am anonymous here. I don't want to look even more like an idiot.
On the template: I see, that makes sense. I only just discovered the Babel templates when I was browsing your page. Then, I had a choice between this and the OL template. Maybe I'll change the template at some point, if anybody else is using it. I was surprised no Icelander attempted it already. Wighson 23:57, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
Alright, I updated the templates for Non. Wighson 05:45, 11 December 2005 (UTC)


[edit] "Mythology"

Zoroastrianism is a monotheistic religion still practiced, its not exactly "mythology", don't you think? --K a s h Talk | email 22:09, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes. I am trying to restrict that cat to articles already identified as "Persian mythology." If I have inadvertently put it on articles restricted to Zoroastrianism, the mother of all monotheistic religions, please feel free to remove it. You don't need to tell me. Wyeson 22:12, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lindsay658

When Lindsay658 added a link to [[Placebo (origins of technical term) to the See also section of Charles Darwin for no apparent reason, my first reaction was to think this could be vandalism, and judging by the "Blatantvandal" tag you added to Lindsay658's user talk, this was your reaction to other such link additions. However I subsequently found that the link did have a rather obscure relevancy to Darwin which was actually of interest and though it's inappropriate on that page, I've incorporated it into explanatory text on other pages including A Devil's Chaplain and The Parson's Prologue and Tale. So with the benefit of hindsight it appears that this was genuine overenthusiasm and not vandalism. Lindsay658 is learning how to do things properly and the links added will be checked for appropriateness and improved or deleted as necessary. Understandably Lindsay658 would like to get the tag removed, and if you've no objection I'll remove it shortly. For once it appears that what seemed like tedious vandalism has turned out to be a learning experience for a useful contributor! ..dave souza, talk 18:12, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I did not reply sooner. You sound very kind and I am glad to read that you resolved the issue without hurting anyone's feelings. Keep up all such good work! Wyeson 05:04, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:League south cutey.jpg

User:Wighson, I noticed that you uploaded a file (Image:League south cutey.jpg) taken from the League of the South's website, saying that it was in the public domain. You wrote, "a small picture for the LS article from the LS website ([leagueofthesouth.org]) and released to the public domain." However, the League of the South's website says "Copyright © 2005 League of the South Unauthorized Reproduction Prohibited". If you obtained permission from this group to use the image, then it would be most helpful if you posted the your correspondence with them. As the matter stands, I have nominated the photo for deletion. (See IFD for 2 September) --Zantastik talk 05:56, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

If you look on the website, you will see that this was released to the public. The picture was carried by major news media as well. This was obvious in disclaimer. You made a mistake. Wyeson 21:15, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Carl-Reichenbach.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Carl-Reichenbach.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you.


[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Bobby fischer-early.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Bobby fischer-early.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. 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. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed 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. This is an automated message from BJBot 13:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:League_south_cutey.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:League_south_cutey.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 13:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/g/User_talk%7EWighson_75bc.html"