User talk:Dalbury/Archive 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Wikilinking start dates

Hi. Please give me a reason why start dates needs to be wikified. Other airport articles do not have this format. Thanks! Bucs2004 06:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't see any exception in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) for airport articles. Wikifying dates allows readers who have their preferences set to see the dates in a format they are used to. Wikipedia is supposed to take a global perspective, and not just be written for Americans. -- Donald Albury 11:06, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Bucs2004. I don't think that start dates need to be wikified as it makes the paragraph look messy-- Sox23 05:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Music of South Florida AfD

Hi Dalbury, I don't know if it's worth saving or not, but the Music of South Florida article we helped with a while back is now being nominated for deletion. I guess I'm attracted to this article by the whole "Donk donk" thing..but it seems there might be some value to it if it can be expanded. Your input would be welcome at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Music_of_South_Florida#.5B.5BMusic_of_South_Florida.5D.5D
Thanks! Dreadlocke ☥ 17:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

KFLL links

In terms of linking start dates for destinations at FLL, please refer to Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports. According to the article, they are not supposed to be linked-- Sox23 05:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

According to the Manual of Style for dates and numbers all full dates should be linked. I do not believe that a project can exempt itself from a guideline. Linking full dates enables user preferences on date formats to work. By not linking full dates, you are in effect saying that readers who have date format preferences other than American do not count, which is an attitutde not compatible with Wikipedia. Oh, and I just looked at Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports, and I don't see where it says anything about linking or not linking dates. -- Donald Albury 11:38, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Will you let me nom you yet?

Will you let me nominate you for Admin yet? I realize it is a hard, mostly thankless task, but you are one of the calmest, most mature, even-handed rational people I know here who is not an administrator already. Say yes! KillerChihuahua^?!? 14:53, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

OK! OK! I'm having trouble keeping up with things as it is, but then who would notice if I fall a day or two behind on my watchlist? -- Donald Albury 15:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

 :) Excellent answer, you show sound judgement as always. Answer the questions, add your acceptance, and make live at your convenience: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Dalbury. KillerChihuahua^?!? 17:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I observe that the most important optional question one might craft has yet to be asked: Even as you aver elsewhere here that you're not particularly interested in sports, you must surely have a preference, as regards athletics, from amongst the big three Florida schools. So, Gators, 'Canes, or Seminoles? Whilst you surely meet every standard by which I might otherwise adjudge a candidate for adminship, I rather imagine this to be, by far, the most relevant question, if only because of how profoundly it speaks to your judgment; I only hope that you answer correctly and I don't have to invoke our most important policy—Wikipedia:Fans of that one school in Florida that shall not be named ought never to be made admins. :) Joe 05:01, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I am a graduate of the University of Florida (in fact, I have three degrees from there), but I never attended a football game there after my freshman year. I am happy when any of the three teams does well (except against Florida), but I don't pay more than passing attention to any of them. -- Donald Albury 12:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

shipwreck project

Greetings Donald Albury, the shipwreck project seems to include what I would call marine accidents - I'd like to see you weigh in on this. It came to my attention at Exxon Valdez best regards, KAM 15:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Kerru Dera AFD DIscussion: use of "vanity"

Just a friendly note to point out that the use of the word "vanity" as a reason for deletion is now discouraged. Instead, please use "conflict of interest" if it is apparent that this may be the case (per WP:COI). Cheers and happy editing! Jpe|ob 22:00, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Compliments

^{Awesome contribution resume.} _{What does that cryptic message in your user page mean?}

Thank you. The message just means that I would rather be adding information to Wikipedia than dealing with vandalism, POV pushing and missing sources. -- Donald Albury 13:34, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Condominiums

[1]

Dalbury, NO!

This is a condominium. People live in condominiums year-round. What is to stop them from sending kids to school?

And, there is a very easy way to prove this. Let me show you the Hillsborough County school zone locator: https://choice.sdhc.k12.fl.us/locator/Default.asp - Type in the address of the property and the schools appear. WhisperToMe 06:02, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

That looks like OR to me. -- Donald Albury 11:34, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

That is the Hillsborough County School District official website. It's as good as a published source, Albury ( http://www.sdhc.k12.fl.us is the district's website ) - I.E. It's not original research. WhisperToMe 15:22, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2006_March_4/ai_n16089878 is my proof for the South Ashley address. Both the school locator tool and the South Ashley address prove the school zoning section. WhisperToMe 15:48, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Well done on passing your RfA with an almost unanimous vote! I'm sure that a passing Bureaucrat will be along shortly to issue you with a shiny new set of admin tools. If you have any questions about using them then please don't hesitate to ask, as I am sure that I would love to know the answers too! There's an admin backlog, so every spare mop should be in use Best wishes and happy mopping, (aeropagitica) 23:59, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Request for Adminship

If you have questions, feel free to leave a talk page message for me or any other admin. Again, congratulations! Essjay (Talk) 00:40, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations on a well-deserved promotion! SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:17, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I can't find a cool image right now, but I just wanted to congratulate you as well :) All the best with the new tools. riana_dzasta 03:12, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations on your promotion, and you're very welcome! --Merovingian ※ Talk 03:29, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Congrats, I'm sure you will be are a good admin. :) See you round! James086 ^{Talk | Contribs} 03:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations, Donald! May you wield the mop with grace and equanimity. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 04:13, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations on your RfA approval! I know that this may seem selfish, but can you please protect my userpage? Thanks! Bearly541 04:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

As I see no history of vandalism on your user page, it would not be appropriate to protect it. It is now on my watch list, however, and any vandalism to it will be reverted. -- Donald Albury 10:25, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations Donald and good luck with the mop. Have a great day! :) ↔ ANAS - Talk 11:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

RfA Reply

No problem, and keep up the good work! Iridescence talk • contrib 06:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, sorry about not noticing your talk page reply preference. I'll remember that for the future! Iridescence talk • contrib 06:13, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 14:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Admin tools

The mop

Congratulations on becoming an admin! Enjoy your new-found powers, and remember to use them only for good, and not for evil. If you would like to try out your new mop, here are some spots that always need loving care: Category:Images with unknown source Category:Images with no copyright tag Category:Images with unknown copyright status Category:Replaceable fair use images All the best! - Quadell

The flamethrower

You asked about images tagged as GFDL but with no source listed. I would hesitate to delete these. If there's a good reason to think they're copyvios (incorrectly tagged), then I'd deal with them individually. But if the person tags them GFDL, I'd believe them unless there's a good reason not to. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 21:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, that's what I figured. In the past I've been able to find the actual sources for some images that were uploaded as GFDL-self, but there is a limit on how much time i can devote to searching for images I am suspicious of. -- Donald Albury 11:53, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Alpha Kappa Alpha

Donald, I am going to take a Wikibreak, but please keep a close eye (say, every day or so) on Alpha Kappa Alpha. We have had an incident, (Ccson, Robotam, and I) with a reoccuring and malicious vandal by the name of Mykungfu. Please feel free to revert the page or protect the page if multiple incidents (see [2]) occur. Thanks in advance! And, thanks for being a Syop! Bearly541 04:09, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll add it to my watchlist. -- Donald Albury 11:54, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Laleena

How do I create a new project page? I am interested in doing such a thing. Laleena 15:00, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

There are some useful links at Wikipedia:WikiProject#Creating and maintaining. Write up a proposal for the project (nothing fancy, just a clear statement of what the project will work on) on a subpage off your user page, and then post a notice with a link to your proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals. You can also try leaving messages on the talk pages of other users that have contributed to the articles that would fall within the scope of your proposed project. When you think you've got enough editors interested in the project, take it live. Look over those links, and let me known if you have more questions. -- Donald Albury 15:16, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Native edits and anti-Indian hate group leaders

Hi. I have noticed that you take keen interest in the Native page: Seneca Nation. You also take keen interest in the UCE page. I would like you to understand that the organization UCE is an anti-indian hate group. The developer of the UCE page is Dtwarren, who is also the head of the Niagara Chapter of this organization. Please note, that when you assist Dtwarren in editing and debasing the Seneca Nation page that you are assisting a known anti-Indian hate group leader in promoting anti-Indian hate across wikipedia. This is not up for debate; it is a well known fact that dtwarren does not dispute.

So, please allow me to ask you if you would find it permissible for the leader of the KKK to mercilessly edit the NAACP page, and if you would find it in your heart to assist said leader of the KKK in his task to defame and debase the NAACP by providing information about the KKK on the NAACP page. If so, please continue to assist dtwarren in his task and I will mark you down as a collaborator of anti-Indianess accordingly. Nya'weh so:oh. Scuggy 20:43, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I have both you and Dtwarren complaining about my edits, so I must be doing something right. You both are pushing strong points of view, which is not helpful in Wikipedia. -- Donald Albury 21:01, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

You are doing something right by assisting in the promotion of anti-Indian hate. Wow. That is rich. It is also wrong.

I am not pushing a POV. If you believe that I am pushing a POV, then please ask a NAACP leader if they think that the KKK leadership should be editing their page. Will you inform them that the KKK leadership can insert whatever they desire on the NAACP page and that the NAACP leadership should have to fight it out every night on wikipedia instead of getting to the task at hand (as you state, Improving Wikipedia).

I could careless about dtwarren's page and his hate group. He is a known anti-Indian and he disgust me. If my strong POV comes out on his page, then it is because it is the page of hate and looking at it makes me think about this organization wanting to spread hatred for my friends and family for reasons unknown to me. The reasons are unknown because I have been to the meetings of his organization. I am a witness to this organizations hatred for Indians, and have seen it expressed in ways that you would not understand unless you saw it yourself. And these views were expressed at me by men just like dtwarren. How could you understand this?

Secondarily, I have noticed that you are an editor for the native pages. So, I must ask, why do you not know about this organization and anti-Indian hate groups, especially a leader of an anti-Indian hate group? Would you not expect this to happen: a leader of an anti-Indian hate group editing Native pages? If you did not expect this, then please take note of other pages edited by dtwarren or his ilk. No doubt, every other Native Nations in the New York area are currently under attack, which is why they all perceive this group (UCE) as anti-Indian.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Scuggy (talk • contribs)

Mr. Albury I do not believe the warning I gave was unwarranted in WP:NPA it states as an example of a personal attack "Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views — regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream or extreme." The above editor has not criticized me for the content that I have edited, but merely the fact that I belong to a particular organization and I am editing. Why do you believe that the warning I gave was unwarranted?--Dtwarren 13:45, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Do NOT place warnings aimed at other editors on my talk page. The warning you placed appeared to be aimed at me. Be careful how you use warning messages, as the improper use of warnings can be considered harassment. -- Donald Albury 15:25, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for any confusion I caused in posting that warning.--Dtwarren 15:56, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Source for {{albumcover}}s

Regarding this:

That is what I used to believe, but I've been told lately that such material as album covers have an implicit source - the album itself; as such the copyright does not reside with whoever actually provided the image file that was uploaded, but ultimately with the album publisher instead. See WT:FU#Sockpuppet Vandal / Deletion of Fair Use images. Kimchi.sg 04:38, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Somebody needs to post the URL where the image was found, or if the contributer took the photo themselves, they need to supply that information. The tenth clause of Wikipedia:Fair Use#Policy says:

The image or media description page must contain:

• Proper attribution of the source of the material, and attribution of the copyright holder (if it is different). (emphasis added)
• An appropriate fair use tag indicating which Wikipedia policy provision permitting the use is claimed. A list of image tags can be found on the Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags#Fair_use page.
• For each article for which fair use is claimed, the name of the article and a "fair use rationale" as explained in Wikipedia:Image description page. The rationale must be presented in a manner that can be clearly understood and which is relevant to the article in question.

-- Donald Albury 04:46, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

What you are saying appears to be flat-out contradictory of previous discussion:

• Template talk:No source: "There are some cases when this tag should not be used. An album cover image, correctly tagged {{Albumcover}}, already has a "built-in" source: its source is the album cover. If one were to provide a link to, for instance, an Amazon.com page that sells the album, that doesn't add any legitimate source information -- Amazon is simply a re-user of the original source, not a source in itself. Other fair use specific tags (like {{Bookcover}} and {{Tv-screenshot}}) are similar." (from January 2006)
• WT:FU: "The rationale for sourcing is to make sure the status of the image is what the uploader says it is; since the status of the image tends to be extremely obvious in the case of album covers and the like, source is superfluous if not outright silly." (from June 2006)
• Lastly, ANI: "[tagging album covers as {{no source}}] is (almost) pointless. The reason to identify the source is to make it possible to identify the ultimate copyright holder for purposes of investigating claims of fair use or infringement. In the case of an album cover the copyright owner is plainly obvious as the music publishing company. The intermediate source (Amazon.com or a person's scanner) is immaterial to the copyright. While you can make a techincal case that the record publisher should be cited by name (Capitol Records, etc) that seems like an overly technical point."

Regards, Kimchi.sg 05:08, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Those are all opinions expressed by individual editors on talk pages, while the requirement to list a source is policy. Policies cannot be over-ridden by local consensus, let alone talk page opinions. I think this needs to be addressed at the policy level. I will start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Fair use. -- Donald Albury 11:21, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

The reason I usually have sprotect for my talk page..

Thanks for taking care of the issue...[3].--MONGO 15:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Changes to Jacksonville, FL article

I am the user who made the addition to this article in an attempt to put the population of Jacksonville in perspective by including metropolitan area comparisons. I have tried to make a similar addition a few times in the past and it has always been removed. I strongly believe that information like this significantly improves the value of this article, and this type of information is given in the articles of most major U.S. cities. While I certainly realize that cities and metropolitan areas are different things, many casual readers may not (or may have only a vague idea), and this creates a significant amount of confusion when talking about the unique city of Jacksonville. We must agree that Jacksonville is a special case simply because of its enormous city-limit area, giving the it one of the lowest central city to metropolitan area population ratios in the U.S. I strongly believe that this reality should somehow be addressed in the opening section of this article. As is, the first paragraph sounds like it was written by the Jacksonville Chamber of Commerce, listing trivial rankings, with only one important fact: the size of the city limit area. While this trivia is certainly true, it paints a misleading portrait of the city in the minds of most people whom will probably not read additional articles linked from this main entry or search for dull, dry articles like Greater Jacksonville Metropolitan Area (an extremely useless entry, offering no additional info at all) or South Florida Metropolitan Area. Unfortunately, city limit populations rather than metro pops. are the most frequently cited population statistics on TV and Atlas/maps, which only contribute to confusion. Speaking from experience, I would bet anything that the large majority of citizens who open a Walmart Travel Atlas on their trips and glance at the Florida Factfile are surprised to read that Jacksonville is listed as the largest city in that state. Then they go to Wikipedia, perhaps read the entire article, and are left only with reinforcement. I used to live in Jacksonville, and I knew many residents who believed that their area of the state was somehow more populous than Miami, but only more "spread out", due to the number of times they heard and read that Jacksonville was the "largest city" in the state. I would much rather hit Jacksonville at rush hour than some of those much "smaller" cities such as Miami or Atlanta, as some readers of the Walmart Travel Atlas may have discovered to their unfortunate surprise. The simple fact is that city-limit populations are ultimately irrelevant (unless you're a resident and plan to vote for mayor) and are never cited by experts in the field, including population statisticians, advertising/marketing consultants, and geography textbooks. The Jacksonville article is perhaps the single most misleading entry I could find in conveying these concepts. Other potentially misleading articles were handled much better such as those of San Diego, San Francisco, Indianapolis, Atlanta, as well as Miami, Tampa, and Orlando themselves. I defy anyone to think that the "Miami, FL" article (which I did not write or edit) presents a less accurate portrait than Jacksonville does (also, the article in no way presents too much information by comparing Miami to Jacksonville)! I would hope that Wikipedia could present a more scholarly approach to these concepts and not give the general reader only simple (and ultimately, misleading and useless) trivia.

It's simple. Jacksonville, Florida is about the city of Jacksonville, and it is the largest city in Florida. We have articles about the South Florida metropolitan area and Greater Jacksonville Metropolitan area which cover the metro areas and which are linked from the city articles. As for defining comparable 'greater city' areas, how would you do it? By zip codes, city used in mailing address, free local calling areas or something else? Note that the Jacksonville population does not include all of Duval County. How much of Dade County would you include as part of 'Miami'? Homestead and Florida City? Kendall? Hialeah? Opa-locka? In any case, it would all be subjective and original reasearch. -- Donald Albury 16:41, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand your reply and I'm not sure you read my talk entry at all. Again, I realize the difference between a city, a metropolitan statistical area, a consolidated metropolitan statistical area, an area of urbanization, etc. My addition was in no way subjective or original research, but from U.S. Census Bureau statistics, and was intended to make the Jacksonville article consistent with Wikipedia articles covering nearly every other major U.S. city (i.e., putting the central city's surrounding metro into perspective in the opening without having to download an excel worksheet list in references). This information in no way detracts from this article and otherwise, the opening is simply a list of trivial details. At the very least, the opening paragraph of this article should state that the Jacksonville metro pop. (yes, METRO, not city) is ranked 42nd in the U.S. as of 2005, but adding that it is 4th in Florda does not hurt. I would add this accurate and scientific info myself, but I seem to be prevented from doing so, which I believe is totally against the spirit of Wikipedia.

I suggest you take this up on Talk:Jacksonville, Florida, as I am not the only editor who feels the same way. -- Donald Albury 17:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

South Florida metro area

I don't think one needs a source saying things like I-95 runs north-south through the area and that the Miami International Airport is one of the airports that serves the South Florida metropolitan area. These are merely statements that summarize what the articles for I-95 and Miami International Airport are saying. There is such a thing as overciting. I did remove claims that were unsourced and left only things that are obvious. --Polaron | Talk 00:12, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe so, but I get irritated by claims that things don't need to be cited because they are 'common knowledge.' Many readers will know little of nothing about the subject of an article, and we should not be asking them to takes things on faith because it is 'common knowledge' to us. 'Common knowledge' can be a very slippery thing. I have had the experience of reading an anthropolgist's description of a neighborhood I lived in. Although our respective residencies in the neighborhood at least partially overlapped, and although it was a small area, I found his description largely discordant with my memories of the area. In short, I don't trust 'common knowledge'. -- Donald Albury 00:54, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Which specific statements in the current version of the Transportation section do you think should be cited? I'll try and find some if I know what the specific issue is. Thanks. --Polaron | Talk 01:00, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll look at it tomorrow and try to find some suitable sources. I apologize for my sharpness earlier. Sometimes I try to move too fast on WP, and miss the subtleties. -- Donald Albury 04:00, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Seminolesmassacreingwhites.jpg

Salem High School (Conyers, Georgia)

I checked a few sites and found the most common mentioned colors for Salem to be garnet and gold. I used the county's site as a main reference point. Ju535 18:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC) Ju535

Raylene links

It looks like you prefer a slow revert war to trying to come to agreement. Please don't. You can cite rules, you can make arguments, you can ask people for more opinions, there is a whole Wikipedia:Dispute resolution process. I'll be glad to follow mediation, asking other knowledgeable editors, or any other reasonable course of action you suggest. But reverting without discussion isn't it. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 14:15, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I have asked for another opinion, here. -- Donald Albury 14:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Excellent. Technically two other editors, of course. :-). I'll cross-link there from the Raylene talk page. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 14:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)