User talk:Imdanumber1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Imdanumber1 will be making rare appearances on Wikipedia because of school on weekdays but should be editing occasionally on weekends. He will make an effort to respond to all queries during the week and will return to a more frequent editing level by Summer 2008 (that's a long time!). |
| Please click here to leave me a new message, and I will respond to you here. I suggest temporarily watching this page until the discussion is over. |
 Archives |
|---|
[edit] Vote for a post-meetup restaurant
I'm charged with making the reservations for us, so let's make it official. We'll do this via voting and everyone including anonymous voters, sockpuppets, and canvassed supporters is enfranchised. Voting irregularities and election fraud are encouraged as that would be really amusing in this instance. Please vote for whichever restaurant you would like to eat at given the information provided above and your own personal prejudices at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC#Let's make it official. The prevailing restaurant will be called first for the reservation. If a reservation cannot be obtained at the winning restaurant, the runner-up restaurant will be called thus making this entire process pointless. Voting ends 24 hours after this timestamp (because I said so). ScienceApologist (talk) 17:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Hornby logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Hornby logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 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.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] New mailing list
There has been a mailing list created for Wikipedians in the New York metropolitan area (list: Wikimedia NYC). Please consider joining it! Cbrown1023 talk 21:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] You are invited!
 |
New York City Meetup
|
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, and have salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the last meeting's minutes).
Well also make preparations for our exciting Wikipedia Takes Manhattan event, a free content photography contest for Columbia University students planned for Friday March 28 (about 2 weeks after our meeting).
In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.
You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
You're also invited to subscribe to the public Wikimedia New York City mailing list, which is a great way to receive timely updates.
This has been an automated delivery because you were on the invite list. BrownBot (talk) 02:55, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Response
No guarantees, but I'll try to take a look. Things have been fairly busy for me here in real life. alphachimp 06:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Bot activity
I was going over the list of bots and noticed that Danumber1bot (talk · contribs) has not edited in a very long time. Is this bot still active and if not, would you object to it being de-flagged? Please post your comments to Wikipedia_talk:Bots/Requests_for_approval#Dead_bots since this is a rather widely-posted message. MBisanz talk 18:54, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Time_Warp_Trio_Passport_to_Adventure_DVD_Cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Time_Warp_Trio_Passport_to_Adventure_DVD_Cover.jpg. 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 Wikipedia articles 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. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.
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 ensure 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Project FMF (talk) 13:48, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] IRT Flushing line
Woah, your edits to the Template:IRT Flushing Line look bad. It looks too much like a work in progress, because it is missing so many symbols. Please revert it back to a previous version and save your version in your Sandbox until we have created more symbols.
- On another point, perhaps we should use the mileage column to insert an
instead of changing the station icon right now. for example...
| IRT Flushing Line | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This is a route-map template for a New York City Subway line.
For information on use of this template, refer to Wikipedia:Route diagram template.
Let me know what you think of using the ... Acps110 (talk) 00:23, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Radiohead redirects
Hello Imdanumber1, how are you? Thing is, I actually put quite a bit of thought while redirecting (I know that Radiohead isn't a singles band), and the fact is, most songs don't satisfy our notability criteria. Per WP:SONGS, "Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been performed independently by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable. A separate article is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article". The fact is articles such as "Sit Down. Stand Up." (which you reverted) do not fulfill our criteria; apart from not charting, no reliable sources have even discussed it. What this means is that the current article is just somebody's OR/POV. So there is no need to "slowly but surely revert [my] edits" because there isn't anything reliably writable about these songs anyway. Another thing thing is, in the case of Kid A, all that has been discussed is already included in that (excellent) article, so individual songs do not warrant their own articles at all.
As for your comment that i did not seek consensus, I believe there was no need. WP:SONGS itself, lists a number of AfD discussions where similar cases of redirects have taken place, so I do not believe a band-by-band/song-by-song consensus building is required. Of course if you have sufficient information from reliable sources about these songs (which wouldn't be relevant to the respective album article), then we will reinstate the song's pages. I look forward to you response and thanks for reading. indopug (talk) 22:08, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmm interesting, does a music video make a song notable? SONGS doesn't say so, and I tend to agree. For example, channels like MTV air live performances of individual songs (even non-singles); they could be called music videos, and passed off as notable otherwise right? In our present case, couldn't "Sit Down"'s video be discussed at the Lying Mouth article or in a Hail to the Thief videos section? Doesn't it seem weird to have an entire article only discusses a music video (note that the song itself is not notable and hence cannot be discussed)? As for the "Idioteque" video, it seems to be a live one that is already mentioned in the Kid A article, so why should it have its own article? (Oh and thanks for pointing out that there is a "Sit Down" video, I'm watching it on YouTube :) indopug (talk) 23:06, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- Hi again. What about "Life in a Glasshouse"? Everything useful & reliable in that article can go to Amnesiac quite easily. As "Idioteque", again, having a popular video does not entail that the entire song is notable, per the notability guidelines. Besides, I think it is covered in good detail in the Kid A article. The "Sit Down. Stand Up." article seems like one big pile of OR and POV unfortunately; that's the main reason I want to redirect these songs. Having a big pile of uncited stuff seems to encourage IPs to indiscriminately add trivia and their interpretation/half-truths about the songs. Among the five redirects you've reverted, do you agree that "Glasshouse", "You and Whose Army?" and "Sit down" can be redirects? None them indicate notability (or even popularity outside of the core fan-base) significantly; "Glasshouse" and "Army" don't even have videos. indopug (talk) 11:36, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- I knew that; I wasn't going to redirect a song that was well-sourced with RS. (Unless of course all that info was already in the album). "Morning Bell" is still worrying for me, large large swathes of OR. The Guardian source just says the lyrics of the song are indecipherable while the jam.canoe link doesn't even the mention the song! Just the quote that Kid A and Amnesiac were twins separated at birth. Everything in the Wikipedia article about "Morning Bell" being a intentional connecting link between the two records is pure speculation. indopug (talk) 17:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
-
[edit] NYC Meetup: June 1, 2008
|
New York City Meetup
|
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, elect a board of directors, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the last meeting's minutes).
We'll also review our recent Wikipedia Takes Manhattan event, and make preparations for our exciting successor Wiki Week bonanza, being planned with Columbia University students for September or October.
In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.
You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
Also, check out our regional US Wikimedia chapters blog Wiki Northeast (and we're open to guest posts).
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Long Beach Branch line template
Okay, I just found out that my proposed line template for the Long Beach Branch of the LIRR was missing Queenswater Station. Now the only question I've got is, was it located north or south of the former Long Beach Marine Railway spur? ----DanTD (talk) 13:27, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not so sure, have you tried running a Google Search? You can also ask NE2 as he finds die-hard references to back up any findings. —Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs • email) 20:24, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- I'm sure you had uneasy altercations with NE2, and so have I, but I don't let old issues affect my performance around here today. Its strange that even having such epic arguments, you can learn a lot to make sure you know what and what not to do. But if you really don't want to talk to him, I'll ask him myself. But take my advice and talk to him, just trust me. —Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs • email) 02:24, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
-
[1] shows that the Marine Railway was not so much a branch as an extension. [2] might be useful if you write about the Queenswater station. --NE2 02:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
- This is good to know, but I have a feeling that I'm going to have to subscribe Historic Map Works in order to get a closer look. ----DanTD (talk) 12:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- What do you need a closer look at? The main Long Beach station can be seen, and the Marine Railway continues on. --NE2 18:19, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- Actually, I can't see any of the stations on that map, whether it's Long Beach, Queenswater, Wreck Lead, or even the ones in Island Park. It only zooms in so far for me. I assume you've actually got an account with the website. But yes, I can see the Long Beach Marine Railway too. ----DanTD (talk) 22:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- No, I don't have an account; I'm assuming that huge box south of the rail line is Long Beach station. For the current purposes, that should be enough, but a better source would be needed to cite in an article. --NE2 00:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
