User talk:Alvestrand

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


feel free to add topics..... at the BOTTOM, please...

Older talk:

Contents

[edit] Please, help to merge or not

See Talk:International_standard#Vote_to_merge_or_not. -- 16, February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Igor Vishev

Question: how should I actually proceed with the permission? What would be sufficient for wikipedia to prove it? (please reply on my talk page) Paranoid (talk) 07:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] T. Jackson King page error

Hi Alvestrand. Checked my author's wiki page recently and noted that someone has added a header that links me (T. Jackson King) with some kind of comic book character named >Jackson King< There is absolutely no connection and I have never been involved with comics except to read them, years ago. Could you please remove this silly comic book item? Also, while updating the edited page, I made the error of trying to input an additional External Link page to my new Author's Web Page on googlepages. This page is an update of the already referenced SFWA page that >is< listed. Plus, there are new stories, poems, etc. on this web page. But a Revert Bot knocked out my effort. Any advice on what is OK re listing Links? Thanks, Alvestrand. Tjacksonking (talk) 06:16, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

No particular mystery here - the "for <other article> see" mechanism is how Wikipedia deals with multiple persons, things, books and so on having the same name. In this case, the comic book is named "Jackson King", so it's not unlikely that someone would type "Jackson King" into Wikipedia and expect to find it. I've amended the header to indicate that "Jackson King" redirects to this page.
WRT the revert - check out the page for the bot that did it, User:XLinkBot. It appears that googlepages.com is a place where people put up spam, so the bot reverts links to it if made by anonymous users. You weren't logged in when you made that edit. If you want to have that link, try logging in first. (BTW, did you ever get a copyright permission notice sent off for the T. Jackson King page?) Good luck! --Alvestrand (talk) 06:38, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi Alvestrand. Thanks for clarifying the comic book character reference. On another author info web page I was credited with a role in a film about this comic character. Sigh. What you have put up now looks fine to me. As for the Googlepages link revert, I'll do as you suggest. When I saw the revert, I logged in as Myself and made the publication/degree/etc. editing changes. I'll log in again to add the googlepages.com Link, and see if the Link edit sticks. Finally, re your fall 2006 query to me re copyright ownership of my SFWA Author's Page on the SFWA home website, well, Of Course I own the copyright, since I created and originated ALL of the page content that shows there. My new web page uses large parts of that content and expands on it by includng new fiction, poems and interview postings on a monthly basis. The SFWA web page was posted, at my request to SFF.Net, several years ago. As an author, I care a lot about copyright, so nothing that appears on any pages which I originate violates domestic or international copyright laws. FWIW, I hereby give over to the public domain all text and graphics that I originate here and on ISFDB. Does that work for you? Tom 65.19.18.152 (talk) 16:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
WRT copyright - sure - just send the same statement in email to permissions-en (at) wikimedia.org so that it's officially recorded, and I hope all will be OK! --Alvestrand (talk) 11:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I'm processing this OTRS ticket now. Was there any copyvio that needed to be cleared? Thanks. howcheng {chat} 17:28, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I can't find any now - I remember that I worried about whether or not this had problems with the SFWA web page, but don't remember how I started worrying about it. Sorry! --Alvestrand (talk) 21:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Undo of self revert in Photon belt

about [1]; are you sure? 2011 instead of 2012 was a recent change by 69.125.241.165 and the edit you reverted was his self-revert 3 hours after this change was introduced. Taemyr (talk) 05:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

hm. The only referenced part I found that referred to either date referred to the "straight dope" article, which mentioned 2011 once, not citing a source. Afterwards, I discovered that someone had added an URL to the "links" section that has 2012 in the title. At the moment, the article's not self-consistent - there's 2011 in the body (twice), and 2012 in the sidebar. I must admit to doing a bit of "shoot on sight" when I see a change by an anonymous IP that doesn't cite a source, and contradicts a cited source.... but I doubt that it matters much to the world. --Alvestrand (talk) 05:51, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Always check recent history when reverting possible vandalism. Quite a lot of vandals make their edits in several instalment precisly to trip up this kind of shoot on sight mentality. If a revision is undid then you risk hiding earlier vandalism since other editors will assume that it's been taken care of. Taemyr (talk) 05:56, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I know - and did check.... --Alvestrand (talk) 06:41, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unicode Book Image

The image of the Unicode 5.0 book has been removed again, this time with a justification given in the Talk:Unicode page. I think that the book image is definitely appropriate for use on the Unicode page, and hope you will continue to oppose its unwarranted removal.BabelStone (talk) 09:09, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up - I've added a fair use rationale on the book cover. As a board member of the Unicode Consortium, I do think that I know what constitutes the standard, and as a Wikipedia editor, I do think that the image adds value to the article without reducing the value of the book! --Alvestrand (talk) 13:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I've only just started my Wikipedia career two days ago, and I didn't want to get embroiled in a revert war. I've known your name for a long time, so it's great to finally make your acquaintance! BabelStone (talk) 14:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks buddy... I appreciate it. Sometimes my eyes dont scan through all the content to sense vandalism, written correctly enough haha... =) --♣ẼгíćЏ89♣ (talk) 23:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Relativity priority dispute / Licorne

Yes, it seems that Licorne wants to make Poincaré the sole originator of Relativity. He also tried to manipulate History of special relativity.
Another problem: The article Relativity priority dispute gives undue weight to non-mainstream views like that of Bjerknes, Logunov, Leveugle, Moodey etc.. Something has to be done. --D.H (talk) 09:42, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

His bias seems to be that Einstein was a Jew, the Jews are bad, therefore a Jew couldn't have done anything good, and therefore Einstein must have stolen the relativity theory from a non-Jew. The logic totally escapes me.
WRT Relativity priority dispute, I think the encyclopedia-worthy information there is that there HAS been a dispute, and Logunov, Leveugle, Moodey etc all have managed to get their views published. (Bjerknes is self-published). At the moment, the article focuses on the disputes themselves; ideally, I'd like to cite someone investigating the reasons why people come up with these theories, and why they gain traction even when there's little factual evidence to back them up. :But speculating about it myself would be WP:OR, so I can't do that. --Alvestrand (talk) 09:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright notices

Figure out the copyright rules on Wikipedia, and how to write a fair-use justification, and one may survive. We can't have images that we don't have the right to use. --Alvestrand (talk) 20:28, 25 May 2008 (UTC) Why don't you help instead of being mean143.81.248.53 (talk) 13:05, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm trying to help. You're pointing out what you want to do, and I'm pointing out how to achieve it. I can't help you if you won't learn. --Alvestrand (talk) 13:34, 12 June 2008 (UTC)