User talk:FirstPrinciples

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

---

Hi FirstPrinciples

I saw your name on the peer review page of Concentration. I teach Phys Chem and was rather dismayed at what NIST is doing to our definitions. I added a comment to Talk:Concentration that you might be interested in nl:Gebruiker:Jcwf

Whoops, I haven't logged in for a few weeks so I didn't get your comment until today. Thanks - I will head over to concentration and check it out. -- FirstPrinciples 08:25, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot 2 Thanks for the welcome, can I talk to you outside wikipedia somehow? 3 Self-rating bio articles 4 Knox College 5 Byford Dolphin 6 Reverting vandalism 7 Frank James Burke 8 List of pubs 9 Hormesis: possible explanations 10 Orphaned non-free image (Image:BabyIllustration.jpg) 11 Replaceable fair use Image:Byford Dolphin.jpg 12 GUCT 13 Info 14 Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Nz100.jpg 15 WP:AUK 16 $100 Image

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Louisa Duemling Valery Korzun Royal Commission on the Electoral System Curtis Crawford Takashimaya Peking University Health Science Center List of heroes of the Russian Federation Anatoly Artsebarsky Creative New Zealand Rodney Sharp Aotearoa Student Press Association Ron Mark Mitsubishi Electric Richard Worth The Dominion Post (Wellington) Brent Catchpole Masahisa Naitoh Pauline Gardiner Michael Foale

Cleanup Right to die The Bone Collector Trial of Saddam Hussein Merge Mangere Henry Hill (mobster) Knox College, Otago Add Sources Lake Vostok Willie Jackson (politician) New Zealand Idol Wikify United States v. Wong Kim Ark Axial piston pump Institute for Creation Research Expand Being Eve Kaikoura SKY Network Television

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 21:04, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the welcome, can I talk to you outside wikipedia somehow?

Thanks for the welcome, and thanks for cleaning up that article I marked yesterday, your work looked like night and day compared to what it was yesterday, I can't believe how well it came out, great job. --Tim Thorpe 00:32, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Tim, thanks very much for the message. If you want to email me you can click the "email this user" link on my talk page, but usually it is OK to leave messages directly on the talk page. Cheers! -- FP ^{(talk)(edits)} 08:25, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Self-rating bio articles

Hello! You asked if it was okay to self-rate articles-- my rule of thumb on that is that it's okay to self-rate to (and including) B (but if someone comes along later and says its really a Start, you need to be ok with that). A's should be given by a non-involved editor though (and of course GA and FA have their own process) --plange 01:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Plange, now I know how to handle future biographical articles... cheers! -- FP ^{(talk)(edits)} 06:43, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Knox College

Knox College has an identity completely indepemdemt from other university halls. It should not be merged --125.238.33.117 13:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you — I am a Knox exie myself! I am still deciding how to deal with the other merge proposals, presuming someone else doesn't beat me to it. -- FP ^{(talk)(edits)} 13:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Byford Dolphin

Hi FP, I just had a look at the Byford Dolphin article today & noticed you had posted some comments. Thanks for your help with editing this article, from the very start. Could I ask you where you found the, "An Explosive Decompression Accident", J.C. Giertsen et al., American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology, 9(2):94-101, 1988. online? from which you scetched the pic. -- Mark

Hi Mark, I will look at my files and get back to you tomorrow. Cheers -- FP ^{(talk)(edits)} 23:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi again. I didn't get the article online, but photocopied it from the original journal in my local medical library. I don't think it is available online anywhere. Cheers, FP ^{(talk)(edits)} 12:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reverting vandalism

Thanks for correcting the vandalism on the Jesse James article. See the article Help:Reverting for the best way to do a reversion. Dabarkey 04:00, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I know how to fix vandalism. The problem was that there were several anonymous vandal edits in a row, and I missed one of them when reverting. Thanks very much for catching that! -- FP ^{(talk)(edits)} 08:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Frank James Burke

Hello FirstPrinciples. Could you please help clean up the Frank James Burke article and WP:CITE sources? If you need any assistance, please let me know, I'd be glad to help. Thank you, Can't sleep, clown will eat me 12:25, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, I will take a look if anything still needs to be done. -- FP ^{(talk)(edits)} 00:49, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of pubs

As someone who has contributed to the talk page discussion on List of publications in philosophy and/or that article's previous deletion debate, I thought you might be interested in participating in its new nomination for deletion which can be found here. Thanks. - KSchutte 17:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks like it has now gone. -- FP ^{(talk)(edits)} 00:49, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hormesis: possible explanations

The page on hormesis has a possible explanations seciton that you contirbuted to significantly. In February of this year, some fact tags were added. I'm informing you because I think the seciton needs cleaning up and you seem like an interested editor. Pdbailey 17:27, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks, I will take a look now. -- FP ^{(talk)(edits)} 00:49, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

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

Thanks for uploading Image:BabyIllustration.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 23:58, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh jeez.

1. The reason this has not been put in an article yet is because I have listed it for a review and obviously I don't want to go to the bother of integrating it into the article if it can't actually be used.
2. You say that the image description says it "may only be used under a claim of fair use." Actually that is not what it says at all. What the image tag says is, "anyone can use this image for any purpose." Now, I might be wrong in my use of the tag, but in the meantime, prima facie, you are wrong to say that fair use restrictions apply. -- FP ^{(talk)(edits)} 10:19, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Well I deleted the image anyway because I can't be bothered arguing over it. -- FP ^{(talk)(edits)} 10:24, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi. The statement "[Wikipedia] shall not license, transfer, or sell the Image or any copies of the Image to any person or entity." makes this image a "non-free" image for purposes of Wikipedia. (Free as in speech, not as in pizza.) With the exception of images being used under a claim of fair use, Wikipedia only accepts images where the author explicitly grants permission for anyone to use or build upon the work for any purpose - commercial or otherwise. Any restrictions incompatible with the GFDL are not permitted. --B 04:34, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

You're right, I should never have uploaded the image. Please forgive my brusqueness but the rules are not always easy to interpret. I'll try to create a truly free version myself when I have the time. Many thanks -- FP ^{(talk)(edits)} 11:42, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Replaceable fair use Image:Byford Dolphin.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Byford Dolphin.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Carl (CBM · talk) 17:53, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GUCT

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article GUCT, 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. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. 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. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of GUCT. Bearian (talk) 16:23, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Info

Noticed ure into pharmacology. What r the negative side effects of testosterone use for body building? I want to build muscles faster. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.203.102.79 (talk) 02:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Nz100.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Nz100.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I did not upload the image. If I recall correctly, I merely took the existing image, straightened it and improved the colour balance. The original uploader was Wikiphreak. However being a photo of NZ currency it seems to meet fair use criteria; see the rules at Template:NZ-Currency. -- FP ^{(talk)(edits)} 02:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:AUK

This is an invitation to WikiProject Auckland, a WikiProject which aims to develop and expand Wikipedia's articles on Auckland. Please feel free to join us.

Taifarious1 09:27, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] $100 Image

Hey there. I noticed this was deleted, so I asked the deleting admin to restore it. Unfortunately, the rationale template kind of needs a source. Do you remember where you got this picture? Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 22:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I did not upload the image. If I recall correctly, I merely took the existing image, straightened it and improved the colour balance. The original uploader was Wikiphreak (who has a slightly disturbing user page). Being a photo of NZ currency the image seems to meet all the criteria; see the full rules at The Reserve Bank.

In this specific case, I think you will agree it is kind of weird to require a source. Can I just say "this is a widely available public image with multiple copies, one of which was scanned by someone?" Thanks for raising the question and have a good weekend. -- FP ^{(talk)(edits)} 03:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, unfortunately. I've uploaded another version, mainly so that I actually know who the source is. It's also a better quality image, not that that means much for fair use. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 02:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)