User talk:Harvestman/Archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

march 2006 - july 2007

Contents 1 Thank you! 2 It's here!!! 3 Playing with the License 4 RE:RPOTD 5 Sidebar redesign final vote! 6 Thanx 7 ArbCom questions 8 Replace "Editing help" with "Cheatsheet" link 9 Portfolio for ArbCom 10 Ref Desk 11 Wikilogos 12 Merry Christmas! 13 New Year 14 Please sign my autograph page 15 Regarding images 16 La noix 17 Metz Cathedral

[edit] Thank you!

Dear Harvestman:

Thank you for your compliments of my survey, I feel flattered! You have the honor of being the 17th person to respond to my survey!

Thank you for your participation. Your responses to the survey are much appreciated!

The final essay should be posted on my user page no later than March 27. Stay tuned!!!

Shuo Xiang 20:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] It's here!!!

Dear Harvestman:

And it's here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Announcing my CS 492 term-end paper: On Wikipedia — the Technology, the People, the Unfinished Work. Image:Wikipedia.pdf

Thank you for all the kind help you have lent me during the paper-writing process!!!

Long live Wikipedia!!!

Shuo Xiang 22:19, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Playing with the License

Hi there. Thank you for actually answering. If you're willing, it should be enough to go to Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#1920s.2F1930s_play_in_rhyming_couplets. and add something like "I hereby agree to dual-license this contributed text both under the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GNU_Free_Documentation_License GFDL] and the [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/deed.en Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license version 2.5]. --~~~~" to your edit. IANAL and this might be full of holes, but it's good enough for me, plus it increases the humorous value quite a lot, the license texts being several times longer than the whole of the play. Of course, if it ever gets printed or performed, I'll send you a copy. Yours, --Dr. Zarkov 09:52, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. :) If you'd like a nicely typeset PDF of the bilingual edition of your masterwork, drop me a line via email, so I have an adress to send it to. --Dr. Zarkov 22:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE:RPOTD

Replied on rpotd talkpage. GeorgeMoney (talk) 22:21, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sidebar redesign final vote!

It's that special, special time! No, grandma's not coming over. No, not time to clean out the fridge. It's sidebar redesign voting time! Yes, the community has narrowed it down to 3 different options, and a vote for the same old original sidebar is a choice one could vote for as well. Voting for multiple options is allowed, and discussion on the whole shebang is right there on the vote page itself.

You're probably getting this message because the sidebar fairy (JoeSmack for now) noticed you commented on the project at some time over on at Wikipedia talk:Village pump (proposals)/Sidebar redesign. Lovely. JoeSmack ^Talk 06:34, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanx

Thanks for moving my question on the right page! I really appreciate that! --Hedwig in Washington ^(TALK) 00:16, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ArbCom questions

Hi. I'm Ral315, editor of the Wikipedia Signpost. We're doing a series on ArbCom candidates, and your response is requested.

1. What positions do you hold (adminship, mediation, etc.)?

1. Why are you running for the Arbitration Committee?

1. Have you been involved in any arbitration cases? In what capacity?

Please respond on my talk page. We'll probably go to press late Monday or early Tuesday (UTC), but late responses will be added as they're submitted. Thanks, Ral315 (talk) 01:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Replace "Editing help" with "Cheatsheet" link

Per your previous interest, here's a link to the updated proposal: Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Replace "Editing help" with "Cheatsheet" link. Please comment/support there. Thanks :) --Quiddity 21:06, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portfolio for ArbCom

On Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2006/Summary table, I added a column "Examples" with links that exhibit a candidate's arbitration skills. My motivation is that as a voter, I don't want to just rely on a candidate's words, but also see their actions. Moreover, I believe a portfolio of "model cases" to remember in difficult situations can be useful for each candidate, as well.

So far I have entered examples for the candidates who registered first (from their questions page), and I'm not sure if and when I will get to yours, so you may want to enter an example or two yourself. — Sebastian (talk) 00:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)    (I stopped watching this page. If you would like to continue the talk, please do so here and let me know.)

I don't think that I have examples, sorry. Thank you for asking, SebastianHelm. -- DLL ^{.. T} 20:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ref Desk

Tu parle francais? Moi aussi. Si tu veux parle avec moi, je l'aimerais, pour practique. :-) | AndonicO ^{Talk | Sign Here} 23:21, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

C'est drôle de voir que tu as une page sur le WP français. C'est plutôt là que tu trouveras moyen de progresser. Je me suis inscrit ici pour perfectionner mon anglais. Écris-moi si tu veux par courriel (mail). -- DLL ^{.. T} 16:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Moi, je m'as inscrit pour dire que j'ai une page ici. Mais, comment est-ce-que tu m'as trouve dans le Wikipedia francais, si je n'a pas fait rien? | AndonicO ^{Talk | Sign Here} 19:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

J'ai cherché dans Google : Andonico. Je me demandais ce que ce nom signifiait, mais je n'ai pas plus d'information. Dis-le moi, si tu veux. -- DLL ^{.. T} 17:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Rien vraiment; j'ai pensait que ca etait un bon nom qui ?sonnait? bien. Et toi? Pourquoi t'appele tu "Harvestman"? | AndonicO ^{Talk | Sign Here} 20:10, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

J'ai trouvé cette page au hasard (random article) et ça m'a plu. Les insectes sont-ils aussi utiles à la Terre que les hommes ? -- DLL ^{.. T} 06:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Quel insect? Le harvestman, ou le moustique? ;-) Oui, je pense qu'ils sont tres important, plus, je pense, que les hommes. Tan pis. | AndonicO ^{Talk | Sign Here} 13:02, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Laissons à cette page de discussions son caractère WP, essaye "email this user" pour continuer ces échanges. -- DLL ^{.. T} 18:00, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikilogos

I've noticed you're very involved here, you might be interested in my proposal for Wikipedia use logo variations created by members of the wiki community to mark national and international awareness days, Remembrance Days, notable anniversaries, and observance days. Please comment on Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Logo Variations and on my talk page. Thanks! FrummerThanThou 05:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merry Christmas!

[edit] New Year

[edit] Please sign my autograph page

- - Please sign my autograph page. A•N•N•Afoxlover PLEASE SIGN, ANYONE!!! 03:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

-- This was reverted by Alphachimp, whom I thank. But I was glad to sign for ANNAFoxlover! -- DLL ^{.. T} 21:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding images

You only need the flickr photographer to give others permission to use the image (aka license). None of the licenses on Wikipedia require him to give up his copyright, although we do have a template for people who wish to do that. - Mgm|^(talk) 18:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

This is where my science stops for the moment. How can I give permission to others without giving up my rights ? The guy asks if he can give permission to WP only and the licensing FAQ here says no, WP does not want that. My question stands : what to tell him ? Thank you. -- DLL ^{.. T} 18:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] La noix

Ah merci! C'etait difficile, parce que je n'suis pas tres bon pour la photographie. Mais, je suis content de l'avoir faire. :-) · AndonicO ^Talk 21:50, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Metz Cathedral

Hi, Harvestman! I just had call to look up Metz Cathedral and noticed that you had put the article up in the first place.

I was wondering what the source of the information is. Basically, it doesn't make sense. It uses the term "perpendicular" which is usually only applied to a particular late style of English Gothic (eg Kings College Chapel). But the word is used without a capital so it unclear whether it is meant as a style or simply a description, suggesting perhaps that the churches are one on top of each other. But then it says "north end".

Also, the term "Roman" is used and linked to ancient Roman architecture. I don't think this is right. Although an early Christian church may have existed, as I understand it the present building replaced a Romanesque structure (ie not 4th century Roman, but 11th century or 12th century) and that substaintial parts of that building continued to exist until about 1600 and there are still some remains.

I have also read that the cathedral is two separate churches that were linked by a single vault, which gives it its distinctive shape. This seems like nonsense as the shape of the cathedral is perfectly regular apart from the north east corner where there is a chapel and porch. In fact nearly all cathedrals are in two parts, longitudinally, so I think the writer was confused but I don't know for sure!

I'm having a bit of a blitz on architecture. See Gothic architecture and Romanesque architecture. Can you help me out at all? Unfortunately, I can't read French. --Amandajm 01:25, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I've done a search on Google already and can't find anything more than a few lines of rather unsatisfactory info on the architecture of the building. It's hard to form a clear picture of what is what. I'll try again. Thankyou. Love the pic of arachnids. I like photographing spiders.

--Amandajm 04:22, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Harvestman!

"You have two cows.

One is full of enthusiasm for knowledge, discovery, or just fandom. The other just wants no personal research, no point of view, no life. "

Does this mean I've offended you? I'm sorry to have to ask, but I'm a bit thick!

If so, I certainly didn't mean to be citical of what you had done, which was obviously to fill in a gap.

Why I want information is not just because I'm pedantic and nitpicking. It has to do with the fact that I have a dozen books here, one of which ought to contain info one Metz Cathedral, particularly when people get online and write that it is their favourite cathedral in Europe. Not one of them does more than a passing mention. I want to know why people enjoy it so much. Is it just the windows. And I want to get a clear picture in my mind of how the various older and newer parts of this beautiful building fit together. Because I'm nutty about cathedrals. And then I'll write about it.

As for PR and POV, I'm afraid I get very critical of experienced editors who simply delete writing which contains perhaps valuable information and simply write PR or POV in the box, instead of "citation needed". It's brutal, and its particularly discouraging to people who don't know the ropes, but might really know their subject.

Roof was a case in point. Written mostly by two experienced tradesmen, one in the US, one in Western Australia (I think.) They wrote it and patted themselves on the back and said "Well I think we've covered everything!" But it was unreferenced of course. Well, luckily I've had a bit of experience with roofs. I restuctured the thing, rewrote their notes into sentences, gave it a more worldwide, slightly less trade-focussed perspective and we dug up trade manuals and a few online sources. I think it is a very good article, but it was basically written by people with know-how rather than academic knowledge.

The conflict as I see it is- on one hand, wikipedia needs experts to write good articles. On the other hand, no-one is permitted to put up their research. In my case, if I look at an English cathedral, I don't need a blinking guide book to tell me that the nave was built in the 12th century and vaulted in the 14th and that the altar rails are Jacobean and the East window is by Clayton and Bell. The building can be read like a document. A good picture is as good as a cited reference.

Wiki also needs people who simply do as you did, and say there's a gap here- something needs to be written about this subject which obviously has significance, what can be done to fill the gap?

My advice is, if you are feeling a bit fed up, go to Simple English Wikipedia and contribute there for a bit. There's not a lot of articles so almost anything that you do is beneficial. And there's very little nit-picking. I do it in the middle of writing something demanding.

--Amandajm 01:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)