User talk:Drivenapart

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Drivenapart, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! VanTucky 15:45, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Drivenapart,

I saw you edited out the words "splendorous and bombastic" from my contribution on the Heavy metal slang page. I expected it to be edited out sooner or later, but I could not figure out how "splendorous and bombastic" is more POV than other commonly used adjectives like fast, hard, loud (as used in the [[[heavy metal]] article f.e.). It's difficult to write a good description of "epic" since "epic" is incredibly POV in itself. Could you help me find a good explanation of "epic"? How can we describe a POV term in an NPOV way?

I looked up some words to best describe "epic" and found words like bombastic, splendorous, heroic, theatrical, maestoso, majestic, etc. but all these terms seem to be POV and PEA. Thank you, Emmaneul ^(Talk) 09:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Your welcome. Some vandals have vandalised my page too and have been reverted by other editors. But it is a normal thing on Wikipedia. Take care. King Lopez ^Contribs 10:16, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Contents 1 ^_^ 2 Thanks! 3 No problem 4 Smile! 5 Why was my article delited 6 oh and thanks 7 The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar 8 Paul Di'Anno 9 Userboxes 10 Your recent revert 11 Regarding Bulldog 12 A WikiDelight For You 13 Fair use rationale for Image:Greater Manchester County Council Arms.png 14 Duck Soup peer review. 15 Dog Article Overview Boxes 15.1 Discussion 16 Las vegas reservation bureau 17 Nicole deleteation

[edit] ^_^

Keep on whacking the vandals! Peacent 10:51, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Cheers for reverting my Autograph Book ;) ACBestAutograph Book 07:48, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No problem

Sebi _[talk] 07:57, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Smile!

[edit] Why was my article delited

hey i have just made my user page and i realised that i had linked the tranmere rovers link to the wrong place i went back to change it and the whole thing had been delited please help me - curttrfc

• How do :o) Nothing personal, the problem was you didn't create a userpage but created an article with your name as the headline - that's the reason it was deleted. To create a userpage, click your name in the top right of the screen (next to mytalk) and edit that page, that's your userpage. You do pretty much what you want there. Any probs, give me a shout :o) Drivenapart 09:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

i kind of answerd my own question soon after i wrote that i found out my self. I have another question the article connie talbot has a photo of her i beive i have a better one how do i replace the current one with my one -- User:curttrfc|curttrfc]]

• Glad you got it all sorted. As for the photo, use the file upload wizard on the left of the page. Importantly, make sure you say why you can use the photo (not just a screen grab, it's not copyrighted and it is available for free use etc). Once you've done that, simply edit the relevant page to point at your picture instead of the existing one and the picture is changed. That should get you sorted :o) Drivenapart 10:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Hate to keep bothering you but how do you get them things on your user page eg this user is from england , this user likes oranges ect once again sorry for bothering you - curttrfc

• Not a prob honestly. I've just put a bit about that on your talk page. Have a look there, and you should be laughing. One more thing, when you sign off use 4 "~" to sign off. Your username, date and time come up automatically then, saves hassle - like this Drivenapart 11:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] oh and thanks

Thank you, and you're very welcome :o) Drivenapart 10:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I'm awarding you this RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for your great contributions to protecting and reverting attacks of vandalism on Wikipedia. Wikidudeman (talk) 08:07, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much :o) Drivenapart 08:09, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Paul Di'Anno

I see you've made a number of edits to his page...not many people make repeated edits on his so thought I'd talk to you. Do you reckon if it was chronological instead of divided into bands? The 1998 version of Battlezone for instance, was just another Paul Di'Anno band and not REALLY a continuation of the original Battlezone. (The Elfoid 16:38, 9 August 2007 (UTC))

My talk page needs clearing out, I guess we could just draft it on there. Everything up to the death of the first Battlezone is fine. His album releases stuff could be put into sub paragraphs about the other bands anyway. (The Elfoid 21:03, 10 August 2007 (UTC))

Infact I just started - just get editing my usertalk page! (The Elfoid 21:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Userboxes

Hey your the only admin who ever replies tome so i wondering can you help me , am i able to make my own userboxes if yes how ;) thanks Template:User curttrfc

[edit] Your recent revert

Hi Drivenapart, I just had a script of yours reverting a constructive edit from the Finland page (removing NPOV bullshit; see Finland talk page). Please follow up and see that it does not happen again. I see that you are against vandalism so I am sure you will! If you feel the language could be improved or the content revised constructively (keeping my points from the talk page in mind), please do so. Cheers, (194.252.5.66 10:31, 5 September 2007 (UTC))

It appears that you are talking about this edit. See my reponse about an identical revert here. Regards, High on a tree 11:09, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding Bulldog

Private use of Wikipedia to get a better Google Ranking —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.2.47.108 (talk) 17:54, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Dear Drivenapart

I have to tell you that is singular your fastness to put back everytime the link to that Bulldog site and to apply the revert function in just two days on the Wikipedia page: Bulldog. I would like to remember you that is not correct to make a private use of Wikipedia to get a better Google Ranking in the word Bulldog putting a link and applying the Revert Function in the same moment in which this site fall down from the 4th to the 12th Google position damaging the honest webmasters and the other Bulldog Sites who has worked heavily to have good links and Page rank. To make you an example I think you will understand that the name of this chapter General Bulldog Information is easily to sponsorize that site who is clearly at the first line being also a very comercial site full of Google Adsense in every page, as the content of the site it is not always correct as I can demonstrate. I also would like to remember you that reverting is a decision which should be taken seriously, not only for friendship. Anyway I can give you reason for the fact that the site can be in his matter constructive but in the same matter of other Bulldog Sites and in this case you have to permit links to the other important Bulldog Information Sites. If you like to have more particular explication I can give to you, I am also asking you to reflect, to be serious and to take out the Revert. Best Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.2.47.108 (talk) 17:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A WikiDelight For You

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Greater Manchester County Council Arms.png

Image:Greater Manchester County Council Arms.png is being used on this article. 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 this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, 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. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:29, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Duck Soup peer review.

Happy New Year, Drivenapart! I've just submitted Duck Soup for peer review in order to find out some better ways to improve the article's (and other Marx Brothers articles) quality. If you're interested in leaving feedback, you can go to the article's talk page and follow the link. Any comments are appreciated. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 22:01, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

So far, there's only been one response to my submission of Duck Soup for critiques. However, the editor supplied some good observations, and even stated that "this article has good potential for Featured Article Status". Well, there's my New Year's resolution: Improve Duck Soup to FA quality and get it nominated. It would be nice to have the Marx Brother's magnum opus as a featured article, eh? I'll need your help, though, in that regard, as well as assistance from others. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 21:05, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dog Article Overview Boxes

Drivenapart, I noticed the large amount of editing and cleaning up you have done on the dog articles containing the overview boxes. I have had my questions already about these boxes partly for the same reasons that you removed sections from the box. My question to you is and I would love to have your opinion on it is, do you think we should make an attempt to setup and maintain a template for such a box instead of having hard coded tables on each of the dog articles? -- Dan9186^{(T • E • C)} February 6, 2008 14:27 (UTC)

• Personally I think that's a great idea. As it happens, there's no real consistency across the overview articles at the moment (even the titles are different from page to page - Overview, Quick Facts that sort of thing. For the time being I just wanted to get rid of POV and deal with consistency when I'd recovered from going through all those pages!). But yes, I do think a template with regard to a basic grounding in the dogs would be a good idea. That said, there have been people who claim that prose would be better than a brief table so it might be worth taking to the Wiki Dogs group to see if they have an opinion on it too. Certainly, I don't think something with brief snippets of information would be a bad thing, something which can then be delved into later in each article. Drivenapart (talk) 15:06, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

That is kind of how I feel about it, it is a good idea that was started and has gotten slightly out of hand. Now would be a good time to organize some control into it or if deemed unnecessary remove them from the articles. I am putting together a sample template that could be used but I would certainly love your input on directing it towards something that might be useful. You say present it to the Wiki Dogs group, which one or both? I've looked through both and found no real defined discussion going about these boxes popping up on the articles. -- Dan9186^{(T • E • C)} February 6, 2008 17:26 (UTC)

• I suspect if we put something on the Talk: Dog page it might stir some response, and possibly take it to someone from the WikiProject: Dogs...they might be able to see if the kind of thing that would be useful and whether it's suitable for Wiki. And no, I've looked about and as yet there isn't any major discussion dealing with it, but there are an awful of dog pages and only a few have had this box attached. I'm also chatting with the guy who put them up User:shawnregan, you mighjt want to have a look at his talk page to see what he's said to my questioning of some of the details he's put in. But certainly, if you can prod me in the direction of your template, I'll have a quick look at it and see if I can help in any way Drivenapart (talk) 10:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

His idea for citing AKC will be something to consider for the template. I have already made a template called AKC Standard that automatically builds a link to the AKC standards for the external links on a page. Similar coding could be used to make an automatic reference that could be shown. As for the overview template you can find it in my sandbox under Overview box dog breed. I've only gotten started it and haven't gotten a lot done on it and wont likely until the weekend.

I will also try and get a post up on the Wikiprojects Dog talk page soon about this and get others input on it. Hopefully this will tell us if it is worth while to get one going or not. -- Dan9186^{(T • E • C)} February 7, 2008 19:00 (UTC)

Well I found some time at work and think I have a start up. You can check the templates page itself in my sandbox Overview box dog breed for the code and such. If you want to preview it I have one setup from where I was creating it in my sandbox. Let me know what you think. -- Dan9186^{(T • E • C)} February 8, 2008 00:34 (UTC)

• I have to congratulate you. What you've done so far look great! Could I make a suggestion with regard to the template - I had a quick look at the <a href="http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/435">UK KC site</a>, and of course, the one thing I realised was potentially missing from the box was the classification group that each dog belongs to (gundog/utility etc). Also, would it be possible to create a template using the UK KC breed standards as well as I do know they differ for certain breeds? If you could point me in the direction of how to do that, I could try and have a crack at it myself. Drivenapart (talk) 09:22, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Well actually if you are going to add the group of the breed for the UK KC then you should probably do it for all. That I believe is already listed in the infobox. It would be slightly redundant to put that in the overview box.

Taking a look at the UKC website, it isn't as easily disposed to making an automatic linking template. If you look at the AKC website you will notice that the address for each breed is the name of the breed and correspondingly the name of the article most of the time. The problem is going to be an easy relation between the breed name and the breed page on the UKC site. As far as I can tell there is no convinient one because the site just uses a number for each breads page. The only thing I can come up with is a gigantic switch statement that relates the breed name with the number on the website. Now if you didn't really want to do that you could make a template that simply takes in the number as a parameter and builds the link from that which would be a lot easier and less future maintinance. If you want/need help with it let me know and I'll be glad to help you. -- Dan9186^{(T • E • C)} February 8, 2008 14:56 (UTC)

I'm a 'casual wiki user' so templates etc. are a bit beyond me, but if there's something that automatically creates a link to the AKC breed standard, just be aware that the AKC changes their site architecture and page naming fairly frequently, and doesn't use redirection, so you'll want to check every so often to be sure the links are still pointing to the right pages.

[edit] Discussion

I've been in and out a lot here lately due to school keeping me busy however I've stumbled across a discussion that has finally begun on the "overview box plague." If you care to come join in on it you can find it on the WikiProject Dogs Talk. Come join in, apparently Shawnregan has only recently been informed that all of his drastic changes are being discussed. I have a feeling this is going to be one of those times where the more people putting in their two cents will improve the outcome. -- Dan9186^{(T • E • C)} February 22, 2008 05:36 (UTC)

Deletion

You asked that the Onion Juice Therapy page be deleted - why not offer a reason why or contribute a suggestion to improve it. Onions are now confirmed by scientific data to be effective in combating cancer. The onion juice therapy has been used for hundreds of years. Other countries accept it and Juice Therapy is widly recognized. In fact the Juice Fasting site is almost a duplicate of what we offered - so why not attack them as well? No, you just do not agree and want to pull the article because you do not agree. If you succeed will you accept the responsibility of the deaths of all of those who would have otherwise taken this therapy and lived. Not everyone is insured and can afford chemo - what about them. Do you accept - no matter, if it is deleted I am asking that responsibility be on you!!!!!!

[edit] Las vegas reservation bureau

Please restore my article. It is not blatant advertising. I used a similar article as a guide: VEGAS.com. Datado (talk) 16:06, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nicole deleteation

Ok since you deleted the page, is it also possible if you to delete the page in the google search cus it usues my real name. thanx

User:G-Rad

No can do, I can't do anything about Google I'm afraid. It caches pages that it finds on the net - if you need/want to get rid of it, you might get in touch with Google, but I don't know how much help that'll be either. Drivenapart (talk) 10:26, 21 May 2008 (UTC)