User talk:EagleOne

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.

[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 14:40, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:UtherSRG/newuser"

This page was last modified 16:32, 31 Jan 2004. All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License (see Copyrights for details).

Thanks for adding the picture to the Worcester, Massachusetts article. It's an excellent addition. I expanded the caption to identify the building as City Hall, based on my memory and your edit summary. JamesMLane 15:28, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I added one sentence on Lake Quinsigamond to the Worcester article, and someone else did a stub on the lake, but you've now written a magnificent article on it. Naturally, I couldn't resist editing it a little, but I didn't find any significant problems. Well done! JamesMLane 06:05, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for copyediting the Lake Quinsig article after me. I can't believe that I left so many mistakes in the article; its embarassing, really. Ah well, I suppose such things happen when you're editing late at night whilst half-asleep : ). I put a lot of research into that article, and I'm really proud at how it turned out. Thanks again! EagleOne 01:53, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)

The effort you put into researching the article certainly showed. As for the typos, etc., I find that, as a general rule, even someone who's wide awake is ill-suited to proofread copy that he or she has written. The author knows what's supposed to be there, and human beings tend to see what they expect to see. That's one virtue of the "many eyeballs" on Wikipedia. I was honored to be the second set of eyeballs for such a fine article. JamesMLane 04:57, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Captions

Many thanks for the help with the Calvin and Hobbes caption! I hope you don't mind I went in and made it a full sentence. (That seems to liven things up a bit and make it clearer for people who read the first paragraph and the captions only.) Thanks again! I'd sure appreciate your help with some other captions. -- ke4roh 10:12, Jul 23, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] The Humungous Image Tagging Project

Hi. You've helped with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiki Syntax, so I thought it worth alerting you to the latest and greatest of Wikipedia fixing project, User:Yann/Untagged Images, which is seeking to put copyright tags on all of the untagged images. There are probably, oh, thirty thousand or so to do (he said, reaching into the air for a large figure). But hey: they're images ... you'll get to see lots of random pretty pictures. That must be better than looking for at at and the the, non? You know you'll love it. best wishes --Tagishsimon (talk)

[edit] Image Tag Needed

Hi. This image uploaded by you needs an image tag Image:Worcester,MA,FranklinAndMain-June7,2004.jpg. Thanks Evil Monkey → Talk 06:50, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the catch. I've tagged it PD-self. -- EagleOne 19:55, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

[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)

Permission to use this image is documented on its discussion page. RivGuySC 04:24, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] MB vs MiB

wrt Half-Life 2: one MB is a megabyte, or 1000 bytes. One MiB is a mebibyte, or 1024 bytes. In computing usually mebibytes are used, and thus this should be abbreviated MiB, not MB. The only exception I know of are harddisk sellers: they measure disk size in MB, not MiB, and therefore the disks are smaller than some users think. HTH, Jordi·✆ 12:42, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] With a name like yours...

you might be interested in - or at least mildly amused by - Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Eaglone Security Community. :) Samaritan 00:26, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hah! What a coincidence. No relation, believe me! Thanks for the heads up. EagleOne 03:18, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image tags

Thanks for cleaning up the polishpd and sovietpd tags. Those had been bugging me for a while. Consistency is good. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 20:17, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Return of the Untagged Image project

You were kind enough to contribute to the Wikipedia:Untagged images project; I beg to draw your attention to part 2 of the project - there are about 12,000 more images in need of tagging. Any assistance you could provide would be most welcome. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk)

[edit] v artillery

yea, you can remove it, theres no use for it, it's old.--Zxcvbnm 14:16, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Noria - Sylvia Drive.jpg

The image is not "a screenshot of a copyrighted movie or television program". It is however a screenshot of a game, being a frame of the video that plays during the song (it appears in the middle of Image:IIDX - Machine.jpg, between the falling notes on each side). --SPUI (talk) 00:34, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Screenshot tag?

I've noticed that you've been removing this tag from images I've uploaded; is it a redudant tag now? If so, why does it still exist? Or had I just duplicated the message?--Cyberjunkie 02:43, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Ah, I see you're the one who uploaded the 'Fromthetorrens' image. First, if you took this picture, let me congratulate you on your work. It's a really nice image, maybe even featured pic material. But it just doesn't look like a screenshot to me, so I removed the tag. If it is a screenshot,the feel free to re-add the tag, but please also add some information on the image's source.
I personally feel that Template:Screenshot is an obsolete tag, now that we have 5 subject-specific tags (film-, game-, software-, web- and wikipedia-screenshot). I've made it my mission to recategorize the images in Category:Fair use screenshots with the appropriate subject tag; that's how I stumbled upon your image.
Generally, if you have a tag (such as screenshot, promophoto, etc.) then you don't ned to include the fairuse tag. Otherwise, as you have said, you're just duplicating the message. – EagleOne 03:15, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)

No, I'm not due any credit for the picture. Unfortunately, getting about to take photographs is not something I've managed to accomplish, so the best I can contribute is screenshots. I had labelled them screenshot, because they are screenshots of television broadcasts. I also labelled them free use because at the time I uploaded them, there was an ambiguity about what a screenshot was - at least that's what I recall. However, I note your point that, as screenshots, I should have recorded the image source. I will attempt to set about doing so in the near-future.--Cyberjunkie 04:21, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Actually, perhaps a Template:television-screenshot could be created to eliminate any vagueness, and confirm Template:Screenshot as a redundant label.--Cyberjunkie 04:27, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Template:film-screenshot already covers television sources, not just feature films as the name would imply. — EagleOne\Talk 05:13, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)
Okay, I'll use that one then. Thankyou.--Cyberjunkie 05:20, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] House article

Good edits on the House M.D. article .. just wondering, do you know what's wrong with the image there? It's not displaying but I checked the image file and it looks ok? ---FoodMarket talk! 14:06, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Not sure... it looks like this was one of the images affected by the hardware failure. It seems stranmge that some images were knocked offline by this failure, but others weren't. Oh well, I guess we'll find out more about this failure in the coming days. — EagleOne\Talk 16:43, May 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Your image has been listed for deletion.

Your image (Image:EliVance.jpg) has been listed in Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion, it is an (orphan), and has been replaced by a large image with a better naming convention (Image:HalfLife2 EliVance.jpg). Head to the page to have your say if you intend to keep the image. ++ 25 20:59, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC) ++

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:PD-awio

Template:PD-awio has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:PD-awio. Thank you.kmccoy (talk) 06:39, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] SocEur template

G'day, EagleOne, thanks for the message. I'm still very new at this, so I'd appreciate any advice.

I emailed the webmaster specifically to ask permission for WikiPedia, and it was granted-with-credit in his reply (that's why it won't be found on the website!). I don't know whether the site-owner would have said "okay" if I'd asked for them for commercial use, but I can ask.

But while I'm leaving messages, I have a question. I've used SocEur templates for Christian Vieri and Radhi Jaidi. When I finished uploading the first image (C Vieri) I emailed the soccer-europe owner to ask him if he considered that sufficient. As you can see if you visit the Vieri entry, he did not, and he added a copyright notice to the caption. I don't know if copyright notices in captions is permissable on WikiPedia.

If so, (and if it isn't a non-commercial licence), I'll add a note to the template telling people using the images to put a copyright notice in the caption as well. If not, I'll have to delete the images that're there.

Cheers, --MarkGallagher 01:36, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I see. Generally we do not allow images by permission only, as those tend to have restrictions on commercial use. In keeping with the "free encyclopedia" theme, the higher-ups recently anounced a ban on non-commercial use images; if these images turn out to be non-comm-use, then we'll have to delete them and find free alternatives.
Yes, copyright notices are acceptable in photo captions. It is all about how you interpret the "with atrribution" part of the license; some require a notice just on the image description page, other require a notice with every use (that is, whenever the pic is used in an article). If you intend to upload many more images from this site, then I suggest modifying the template to include a copyright notice, a la "Image copyright (©) http://soccer-europe.com/".
While we're on the subject of modifying templates, may I suggest that you put a link to the license in the template itself? You could put the text on your user_talk page (or a subpage). Just make sure to get the webmaster's permission to post the email online before you do so; he/she may not want to have their personal correspondence available for everyone to see!
Happy editing, — EagleOne\Talk 23:43, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the welcome! Worcesterite looks like such a crazy word when you see it in print! - orioneight (talk) 01:43, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Worcester, Massachusetts - external links

Before we get into an edit war over external links (which, by the way, I modified to those I believe are actually relevant to the article), there are some questions that I need answered to convince me that the links that I eliminated should be in the Worcester article:

  1. If the links are available in other articles, what special significance do they have concerning Worcester (and hence justify their need to be in the Worcester article)? Merely providing more publicity for a particular organization by placing it in several articles is a very bad reason for I don't believe Wikipedia should be a link farm (a search engine can easily do the job).
  2. Do the links have information about Worcester overall that isn't/can't be covered by the article itself?

I hope to have this issue resolved before it escalates. Pentawing 06:23, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

I must admit I acted rather rashly when I reverted your edits. Your deletions seem to be consistent with the Ext. links sections of other city articles. I won't contest the links that you deleted. — EagleOne\Talk 16:33, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] King of the Hill

Thanks for the contribution on King of the Hill over at wikiquote. I totally overlooked the "fitty". Sometimes it is hard to make out what Cotton is saying.--Guitarist6987876 20:26, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tags on Image:ViewCVS.png

Hello. I'm a bit confused as to why you have replaced the existing {{software-screenshot}} with {{mac-software-screenshot}} and {{web-screenshot}}.

The second one I can sort of understand, but the screenshot is not of a website. It is of a piece of software that just happens to have a web interface.

The first one I don't understand at all. Ignoring the fact that you've tagged it again as a type of software despite the web tag, what makes you think this is Mac software? --TheParanoidOne 11:29, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi ParanoidOne, I tagged that image with mac-software-screenshot primarily because of the two interface elements at the bottom of the screen: the listbox and the button. Generally I tag any webpage screenshot with both the web-screenshot and software-screenshot tags, unless it contains absolutely no interface elements (including scrollbars, status bars, tabs, menubars, toolbars, etc.). When we license an image, we have to take into account everything in the image, including the look and feel of the software interface elements.
Why specifically mac-software-screenshot, you ask? Because the look-and-feel of the interface elements in the image is reminiscent of Mac OS X, thus the mac-specific tag. — EagleOne\Talk 18:42, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
OK. So for the first point, perhaps a {{web-software-screenshot}} template might be appropriate for software that only has a web interface. Saves having to use two templates which a) cause clutter and b) aren't quite correct.
For the second point, that classification method seems illogical to me. The software itself is not running on an a mac as far as I know. Most likely it's some form of unix (Sourceforge would have more information). The screenshot itself was not taken on a mac. It's a screenshot of Opera on Windows and just happens to have a mac-like skin applied. Tagging things based purely on appearance just doesn't seem right to me. I understand that {{screenshot}} is being deprecated, but what's wrong with just {{software-screenshot}}? I'm going to revert the changes for the moment, and suggest the creation of web-software-screenshot at the Image copyright tags page. --TheParanoidOne 20:53, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Source needed for Image:Stockxchng internet browsers.jpg

Hi, I tagged this image as {{no source}}. The summary says that it is from stock.xchng, but that itsn't enough. Could you provide a source URL for this image so that I can reclassify it? Thanks, — EagleOne\Talk 04:01, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I've added the tag. -- user:zanimum

[edit] Source for Image:Blairjsmithfuneral.jpg

Hi -- Unfortunately I don't have the source. I was not the person who originally uploaded the file; as I recall I only reverted it when somebody vandalized it somehow. Greyfedora 02:59, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Apologies for deleting comment

I just wanted to give my sincerest apologies for doing something absolutely retarded. (I assume the reason was when I saved my added comment as a text file of a whole section on another computer and then copy and pasted the text after clicking "edit this page" instead of "Edit" beside the section. Of course, I just had to be ignorant enough to not realize the chunk of text missing at the top before I clicked the "Save Page" and then clicked the X at the top-right almost instantly, certainly before I had a chance to see what was missing.) I hope you don't feel that reading this was a waste, but if you do, you can bitch at me and I'll never do it again. --70.25.168.90 06:23, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Not a problem. Just be a little more careful next time. — EagleOne\Talk 22:31, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Source for TIE Bomber

Pulled that pic from starwars.com Encyclopeida. Seems to be copyrighted, but as you long as you mention where it came from it seems to be fine.

[edit] tie interceptor

Hi, I uploaded that image over a year and a half ago (may 2004) and cannot recall where I got it from. My apologies & have a happy new year :)--Rangi 10:27, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Low value links

Hi David, a few days ago you reverted my edit to this page. I did nothing but delete the low-value links per the MoS. Why did you revert my edit? — EagleOne\Talk 17:52, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I disagree that year links are low value. dml 22:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Year links, as a general rule, add very little information to an article. As such, I will continue to remove them wherever I find them (except for full date links). However, I do not want to get into an edit war over this, so I will leave the A&P article alone. — EagleOne\Talk 21:04, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vote for naming convention

I noticed that you added a comment to a defunct poll. I have reverted your changes to the poll though your comments and votes are appreciated at the ongoing poll. Thanks, --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 18:23, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

My apologies. The MoS directed me to the archived poll, and I didn't stop to read through the entire page before I made my edits. Thank you for pointing me to the right page. — EagleOne\Talk 18:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Good catch on micron v. Micron Technology on the high speed photography page. Ehusman 20:39, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Hi I'm a new Wikipedian from Natick... just popped in to say hello to a neighbor:

This user is a citizen of the United States of America.
This user is from Massachusetts.

Image:Peace Sign 2.svg Merlinus (talk)

  • Hi I Am Marc:

I was recently married to my lovely wife; We have lived together for several years already...

  • We love cats (3 currently own us)... Jeffy(15), Echo(6) & Gizmo(3). All sleep with us in the big bed and no room to move an inch.
  • I was Disabled in a 1993 (Coma)/ and am very slowly recovering. It's tough going out sometimes, though with friends I still do. I have a few supportive friends.
  • I am an "Unenrolled voter." Democrat/ Republicans, I don't care, whoever serves makes my life better in the long run I vote for!
  • Avid reader. Has collection of many hundreds of rare books. Especially Science Fiction and Fantasy.
  • Avid Music collector (2,500 albums)...mostly bootlegs...mostly rare bootlegs...Stones, Kinks, Clapton, Beatles. and solos!

I am what I am I'm strongly opinionated about disabled peoples' rights and jobs for American citizens who have trouble finding minimum wage jobs in my state today and support Universal health care, I would be dead if I did not have it. I am an idiot about Internet social skills. I hope that the Immigration Reform bill will protect disabled citizens who wish to work like myself first before considering allowing new people to come here. I was searching for an internet forum to be my outlet to express my needs, but found that Wikipedia is not best suited for that. I'm brushing up on Wikipedia's rules of conduct, and slowly starting to begin contributing again.

Current book and CD I own hundreds of rare books

  • Current Book Jack Whyte: "Uther"
  • Current CD Faves:
    • Warren Zevon... "Life'll Kill Ya"
    • Howlin' Wolf: "Greatest Hits"
  • Latest Flick: "Charles II: The Last King"

Image:Peace Sign 2.svg Merlinus (talk)


[edit] Skaggs family image tagging help

Hi, I need some help with some copyright tag selection, please. The article under construction can be found at "Skaggs Family". There are three categories of image sources that have and I think I've only decoded one tag so far and it doesn't seem appropriate for what I'm trying to do. Taking this case first: I have a physical letter from the publisher of a report granting me permission to put 4 images on Wikipedia. It seems, however, that the {copyright} tag, appropriate for this category, now doesn't enable this permission(???)

The other sources fall into websites and newpapers. The websites are from Safeways, a Skaggs Health Center site acknowledging the Skaggs couple who set up the Center, and a site that covers the history of grocery stores, called groceteria. I have contacted the latter one to gain permission us use 3 images from there.

The images from newspapers involve one set from the early 1900s and one from the LA Times in 1988. Please help me find the the appropriate tags for the websites and newspaper sources and help understand why I can't use the copyrighted material when I hold a letter giving permission to use 4 images in Wikipedia only. My user name is Don Nielson but I'm new to this world. Thanks.

Hi Don, welcome to wikipedia. Your question about copyrights is one that I've seen crop up quite a few times on the discussion forums. Basically, since this is a "free" encyclopedia, we want all content to be licenseable under the GFDL or a similar license. What this amounts to is basically allowing anyone to use the images for any purpose, including commercial interests, as long as credit is given to the original author. Statements giving explicit permission to wikipedia used to be acceptable, but The Powers that Be changed that around May 2005. The reason being that such stements allow for the images' use on wikipedia, but they do not account for third-party users (people who download images from here and use them for their own purposes).
For the newspaper images, I'd say you can make a good case that the old images falls under the public domain, given its age. If you can, upload the image's date of publication and the name of the newspaper in which it was published, so that this can be verified in case anyone challenges the its legality. The newer image is probably still subject to copyright. If I recall correctly, the copyright term in the US is 50 years after the death of the author.
As for the website images, make sure that the websites actually hold the copyright to the images on their pages; since its very easy to duplicate images on the Web, you can't take this for granted. Assuming that the websites do hold the copyrights, seek out the owners to see if they will allow publication of the images under a GFDL license. — EagleOne\Talk 01:27, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Userbox

I have recently created a Star Wars: Obi-Wan userbox and would like you to have it on your userpage because of your edits in the beginning of the year to the article, Star wars Obi Wan. For editing well in that article, you might as well have this (if you want it).

Obi-Wan This user enjoys the game Star Wars: Obi-Wan.

If you hate the game, please don't take offense on me. If you decide to put it on yr userpage, just copy and paste the userbox template on it and use it. This thing is sort of like a reward. Please tell me if you put it on. Thank you. Weirdy 09:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC) The Second Weirdy?

Thanks for the offer, Weirdy, but I will have to decline. I don't hate the game, I've just never played it, and it would be wrong for me to say that I enjoy it when I haven't seen it. — EagleOne\Talk 18:21, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Copyright Tags

Hi, I need some help with determining copyright status of some as-yet-unloaded images. I want to make sure I do it right the first time. I'm planning to write an article about a well-known WWII Luftwaffe Sergeant. He has since passed on, but his family wrote to me and told me they would be willing to pass along digital images of photos they have in their/their father's personal collection. Some of these photos were included in a book about their father and the author (U.S.) of that book has also been contacted about allowing use of those photos for this project. What tag goes on those photos then, or do I need to get additional info/permission from these kind people before I can proceed? Many thanks. ScreaminEagle 20:02, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: George Mason article

I found it a little messy that some 24 characters had various types of disambiguation in their brackets: Some had (24), some had (character), some had (24 character). I though they should all be consistent. Look at all the characters articles for Prison Break. They all have the same disambiguation. --T smitts 18:20, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signature

Sorry about that on Talk:VMware. My mistake. — JeremyTalk 01:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Help

Hi, I saw that you were helping on the image copyright tags page so I came to ask for some help. I'm not quite sure what I should tag this image with [1] (I haven't uploaded it yet). The website (morguefile) says that its images are free for use, see the terms, but I'm not sure which tag I should use. I'm hoping you can help. Thanks :) James086 Talk | Contribs|Currently up for Editor Review! 14:03, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notability guideline being developed for malls

You have commented on the talk page for List of Shopping Malls regarding criteria for inclusion. Please see WP:MALL where there is an ongoing attempt to create a guideline for which shopping malls are deserving of articles. Your thoughts are appreciated. Thanks!Edison 06:45, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

The article Boston Public, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup.

If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.
You have been left this message by PocKleanBot, an automated process that notifies editors that articles to which they may have contributed on more than one occasion in the past now need cleanup. If you have any comments or object to this message being left, please leave a message on PocKleanBot's talk page.

[edit] Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas, and May the Edit be with you, always. T-borg (drop me a line) 19:51, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Linkimage

Template:Linkimage has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 22:51, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] April 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. An article you recently created, Diskeeper Corporation, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new articles, so it will shortly be removed (if it hasn't been already). Please use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do and please read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. Coren 02:26, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

First of all, hold the "Welcome to wikipedia" crap; as you can see from this very talk page, I've been a contributor since 2004. And second, why do you think that my new article doesn't conform to the guidelines? There are plenty of articles on software companies already. This one is needed due to a debate on the Diskeeper article about the relevancy of some content to said article. My addition creates a perfect home for the content. — EagleOne\Talk 02:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
FYI I agree this seems abusive. I posted a comment on his talk page, but I'm sure nothing useful will come of it. Oh well. --Gtcaz 10:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Military-insignia

Template:Military-insignia has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Megapixie 03:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of EditPad

An article that you have been involved in editing, EditPad, has been listed by me for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EditPad. Thank you. Vacuum Cleaner 01 21:41, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Non-free use disputed for Image:GarrettHidinginDarkness-Thief-DeadlyShadows.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:GarrettHidinginDarkness-Thief-DeadlyShadows.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. (ESkog)(Talk) 17:35, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:EditPad Win32 544 Screenshot.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:EditPad Win32 544 Screenshot.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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 18:56, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

There was a second AfD nomination. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EditPad (2nd_nomination). —Kurykh 19:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Deleting the article 2 months after an AfD wouldn't have made much sense, right? :) —Kurykh 19:23, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for sticking that last little insult in there. Really appreciate. Real mature.
I did not see the second nomination, because it the first nom didn't link to it. That, and the search function is terrible. — EagleOne\Talk 19:53, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
"Last little insult"? Please explain. —Kurykh 19:54, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Obviously it doesn't make sense to delete an article 2 months after a failed AfD nom. I don't need to be told that, so please don't insult my intelligence. The reason why I started this dialog with you is because I could not find a second nom. The 2nd listing didn't appear in the archived AfD debate pages, and it wasn't linked on the first AfD nom page. I have now linked the two pages. Also, the shell page links to the first nom, not the second; thus, the confusion. — EagleOne\Talk 20:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks.

Thanks for the help on SESAC. —Toby Bartels 21:40, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Parallels Desktop for Mac

Your comments are sought to resolve the issue as the page is scheduled to be unlocked for editing in a few days time and I hope to have an understanding before then to prevent future conflicts. This will be my last reminder to you as I do not wish to bother you. Cheers. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 10:01, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Compact fluorescent lamp

Please see my comments on the talk page regarding the desirability of separate Notes and References sections. Thanks. Edison 17:18, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WorcesterMA_Downtown.jpg used on businessweek.com

Just thought you would like know and credit was given.

Article: Slide Show: America's Most Affordable Housing Markets referenced by "Affordable Homes in Every State"

Direct to photo: http://images.businessweek.com/ss/07/09/0926_housing_market/source/22.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.107.234.206 (talk) 12:37, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for the heads up! — EagleOne\Talk 14:17, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Greendale Mall

Greendale Mall, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Greendale Mall satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greendale Mall and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Greendale Mall during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 03:42, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Portal location

Portals go in the "See also" section. See Template:Portal 199.125.109.56 20:55, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I put portals in relevant context, not isolated in the see also section. — EagleOne\Talk 00:44, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
And I move them back where they belong. They are links to other relevant information, just like all the other see also links. 199.125.109.56 (talk) 15:31, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
And I move them back where I want them, in relevant context. And just who the hell are you?? — EagleOne\Talk 15:33, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please use the Move tab to rename articles, instead of cut&paste

Hello, EagleOne. It appears that you copied and pasted List of Virtual printer software to List of virtual printer software. Please do not move articles by copying and pasting them because it splits the article's history, which is needed for attribution and is helpful in many other ways. If there is an article that you cannot move yourself using the move link at the top of the page, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Also, if there are any other articles that you copied and pasted, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you, Shawis (talk) 06:49, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Windows Home Server

Rolled back your removal of pricing information. Microsoft doesn't sell any OS direct; WHS is available through suppliers like everything else. Now if you mean off the shelf, then yes that's true; but it is available for enthusiasts; indeed MS pitch it to them as well, for System Builders rather than OEMS.--Blowdart | talk 19:52, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:ErinBrockovichDVDCover.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:ErinBrockovichDVDCover.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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Quentin X (talk) 16:36, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Fixed an LDAP link" on Automounter

Out of curiousity, what was broken? I do think it improved the link, as it now gives an expansion upon rollover, but it wasn't actually broken. I only bring this up as it might be a symptom of an incipient urge to fix wikilinks that aren't broken. Cheers,NapoliRoma (talk) 20:22, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

So the real issue here is my use of the word "Fixed" in this context, instead of "Improved". OK. I chose that word for the sake of expediency. It takes less time to type "Fixed". Your point is valid, that it technically wasn't broken; however, I just don't care. As for "fixing links that aren't broken", I do on occasion check for pages that link to "LDAP" the redirect page and point them to the article. I do this mostly when I'm bored, and because I believe that articles should link directly to the intended page, not a redirect page.
Your implication is that I shouldn't "fix" links that aren't broken. I ask, "what's the harm"? I will continue to "fix" those pages that link to "LDAP" whenever I get bored; though, maybe I'll start writing "Improved an LDAP link" in the edit summary to settle the anal-retentive crowd. — EagleOne\Talk 21:25, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


Sorry, I seem to have touched a nerve here, which was not my intent. As I said, I recognize that adding the pipe in this case is a net goodness, since it provides an expansion of the initialism if someone rolls over the link.
However, I didn't mean to imply that in general, unbroken links shouldn't be fixed; I was actually hoping to be very explicit about this.
In some cases (and acronym/initialism expansion is the only one I can think of), it's acceptable; in most cases, at best it's editing churn -- especially since what's the "real" article name and what's a redirect can and does change. At some point in the future, someone may consider that no one ever says "our Lightweight Directory Access Protocol server must be down" and change the name of the article to "LDAP" -- is it then ideal to update all the articles that linked to the former name, even though it still exists as a redirect? In other cases, you may be circumventing an article name that later becomes an article of its own.
That's why I included the link to Wikipedia:Redirect#Do not change links to redirects that are not broken, which covers "what's the harm?" In the greater schem of things, though, it's not the most egregious crime on WP; carry on if you must. But I did want to point out it goes agsinst guidelines, for what seem to be decent reasons. But again, I didn't mean to be contentious about it.--NapoliRoma (talk) 19:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deleting Green IT link on Green Computing page

Hi - I have tried to add the Green IT Event link to the Green Computing page. You have deleted it as 'it is blantant advertising'.

I don't quite understand why an event dedicated at all issues of Green Computing is not worthy of being linked to, in comparision to say:

Software LocalCooling - a free power management tool for Microsoft Windows from Uniblue Labs that allows users to optimize their PC's energy usage. SusiClimate - a Mac OS X application which calculates the PC's current CO2 emissions in realtime

In the case of LocalCooling this software just does what the OS can do but with Uniblues branding all over it!

Also Green IT http://greenit.net/ - is a consultancy!

I am starting to lose faith with Wiki as events are always logged as spam whereas companies are regulary listed. I also cite that CES in Vegas is listed in Wiki - that's an event.

Green IT Event is going to be very important for raising awareness in the UK over Green issues.

I would also submit that the event includes involvement from Microsoft Forrester VMware Dell ComputerWorld UK

And the content includes debates, seminars, workshops, government awareness raising activity etc.

Most of whom are listed in Wikipedia.

The event link by the way will not become redundant as the event is annual and will includes a directory of suppliers, news, white papers etc all year round.

Yes - it is companies responsiblity to advertise their products but in business companies deal with other profit making industries and as this thread talks about mainly business issues (virtualisation) so most relevent links will be to businesses?

So with all the discussion above I submit my case for the entry to stand. I submitted twice by the way so as to attached my login to the submittal so you know it's me who submitted.

yours faithfully

Arran Coole www.aspevents.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aspevents (talk • contribs) 10:40, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of energy drinks

There's a question you might be interested in on Talk:List of energy drinks - should it be notable only? An ongoing list without references seems out of keeping with WP:NOT, but I'm not 100% convinced. What do you think? WLU (talk) 20:16, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. I'll post a reply on the article's talk page. — EagleOne\Talk 20:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Looking forward to it. Furhter comment, your talk page is pretty long, have you considered archiving? Long pages take longer to load up for people on slow servers. If you paste the following onto your page, it'll archive automatically anything older than 7 days. Very convenient. Paste it at the very top of the page (without the nowiki tags) and it'll take care of everything for you. WLU (talk) 20:26, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

{{User:MiszaBot/config|maxarchivesize = 250K|counter = 1|algo = old(7d)|archive = User talk:EagleOne/Archive %(counter)d}}

Aw, you said you'd post and you never did! I've been culling redlinks, but I would really like someone else's opinion on this - should the list contain only blue links, or is it OK as long as even the parent company is a blue link? D'you think this is worth bringing up on a noticeboard or Talk:Lists? WLU (talk) 20:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Celtics?

 Please accept this invite to join the Celtics WikiProject, a WikiProject dedicated to improving all articles associated with the Boston Celtics. Simply click here to accept!

- Milk's Favorite Cookie 18:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] nbsp on Monster Energy

Isn't it standard practice to keep numbers and units together with a non-breaking space? —Random832 (contribs) 18:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I've never heard of that being standard practice. Can you point out a policy that recommends the use of nbsps in this situation? — EagleOne\Talk 18:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
WP:MOSNUM#Non-breaking spaces —Random832 (contribs) 17:16, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for clearing that up. — EagleOne\Talk 21:53, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of speech recognition software

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of List of speech recognition software, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: List of commercial speech recognition programs. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:43, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] LDAP Software - clients...

DirectoryMark uses LDAP, yes, but it is not actually *useful* for its stated purpose. I.e., as a directory benchmark suite it is worthless. It also hasn't been updated in years, there's no value in referencing it.

It is single-threaded, so it doesn't generate enough load to indicate the actual performance of the target server. Generally its load-generator scripts use a broken random number generator, so it doesn't actually test across the full range of entries in a given database. And of course, the load generators are pure perl code, so they're extremely slow. There's at least a 100:1 difference between using the pure perl vs e.g. Net::LDAPapi which provides perl wrappers for the C API.

DirectoryMark should be dropped from this page and never mentioned again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Highlandsun (talk • contribs) 22:51, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

"...never mentioned again"? Sure sounds like you have a grudge or something against DirectoryMark. Even if that's not the case, the last update brought around LDAPv3 support, which makes it compatible with the most recent version of the protocol. I think we should keep it on the List of LDAP software article, because it LDAP software, and I still find it useful for it's intended purpose. Let the reader decide if directoryMark is a good fit for their needs. I'm not in the business of making up other people's minds, which is what you're asking by completely taking DirectoryMark off the list. — EagleOne\Talk 01:15, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Their package hasn't been updated since 2003, and as I already mentioned, nothing that it claims to measure bears any relation to reality. If you look at their published reports, the last LDAP server they tested was Netscape 3.0. They still quote that they adhere to draft 00 of the LDIF spec, even though LDIF was finalized as an RFC years ago. It has no relevance to LDAPv3 today, they don't even reference the RFC4510-xx series of specs. If you think you're getting meaningful results from it, you're seriously deluded. If your aim is to provide a high quality of information here, then even suggesting that DirectoryMark should be used is derailing your goal. Highlandsun (talk) 17:16, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
While I don't appreciate you calling me deluded, there's no denying that DirectoryMark has not been updated for many years. Whether the data it produces bears any connection to "reality" is your opinion, and you're welcome to it. I still say we should let the readers decide whether DirectoryMark is a good fit for their needs. I'm willing to compromise with you and move DirectoryMark into a "Historical" section or else mark it as such, if you're willing to lay off the insults. — EagleOne\Talk 21:28, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Everything I've listed for its shortcomings are facts, not opinions. DirectoryMark is full of bugs and is technically obsolete, these are facts. The numbers that it yields are much smaller than real world applications will observe, and that is also a fact. Its stated purpose is to measure the performance of directory servers - that is also a fact. The bugs in its load generators and their overall poor implementation prevents it from accurately measuring a directory server's performance - this is a fact. What is insulting is that you ignore all these facts and label them as opinion. "Letting the reader decide" is valid when the choices are reasonably equivalent and readers are already cognizant of the ramifications of each choice. But unless you've used each of these packages extensively, as I have, you aren't going to be sufficiently cognizant, and on technical merit the choices are far from equivalent. Of course, if you already knew the pros and cons you wouldn't need to be reading a Wikipedia article. Marking it as "Historical" is a start, but that's still too mild. The LDAP world has left it behind, for numerous solid reasons, and you haven't even hinted at any of them. Highlandsun (talk) 22:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletion of Mega Lo Mart

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Mega Lo Mart, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? « ₣M₣ » 19:12, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletion of Hand Held Speech

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Hand Held Speech, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Justpassin (talk) 18:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)