User talk:Jkp1187

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Jkp1187, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

The Wookieepedian 18:11, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi -- I removed your description of the Cantonese pronunciation of "Liang" from Liang Dynasty for a couple reasons:

  1. With historical entities, unless there is a particular reason to add the pronunciation in a dialect, adding pronunciations in dialect is an invitation to add an infinite number of pronunciations. In the case of Liang, I did not see a particular reason to have a Cantonese pronunciation.
  2. If indeed a Cantonese romanization is warranted, it should really be done by citing either the Yale or the Jyutping standardized romanization methods.

--Nlu (talk) 18:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Selective Prosecution: your Mansa Musa edit

I'd be interested to know why you felt that "there was no way that was fair use" when there are photos including this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Hatshepsut_in_Civ4.jpg

on major articles. Why stop on Mansa Musa, when you have dozens of articles out there with game screenshots, which according to your POV are not fair use?


Quite so. That image is now removed, too. Appreciate your help on this. It is not necessary to show an cartoonish computer image for a copyrighted computer game from 2005 to discuss a leader who ruled in the 1300s, for instance, or in ancient Egypt. On the other hand, such photographs might be construed to be appropriate in a discussion of Sid Meier's Civilization IV, so I see no fair use problems there. This is not my PoV, but rather the requirements of the Copyright Act.

The use of the Civ4 image in Hatshepsut is quite different from the use of the image in Mansa Musa because in the Hatshepsut article the image is used in the context of a discussion of Hatshepsut in pop culture, that includes Sid Meier's Civilization IV, while the Mansa Musa pic was stuck in with no context. To my understanding and that of the colleagues I have consulted with, the usage in Hatshepsut does constitute fairuse and I have restored the image. If you have information that is more particular about why the image would not constitute fairuse please bring it to my attention. Thanks. -JCarriker 18:58, 3 January 2006 (UTC)


I suppose that's close enough for government work.

Please sign your comments using -~~~~. I hope that the above comment is not meant as an insult. -JCarriker 15:31, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, looks like this is moot point, as the image has been removed.


templates substituted by a bot as per Wikipedia:Template substitution Pegasusbot 04:52, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The War in 2020

Thanks for contributing to my article on The War in 2020, it's nice to see that someone else is familiar with that book. CynicalMe 22:35, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gellner

"Gellner goes on about nationalism at the drop of a hat" isn't quite fair to a much-published, much cited scholar. Looking at nationalism from the outside, as an ideology, is very much in vogue in many fields of social science, and Gellner is one of the people who made this possible. I'm not going to fight the deletion, because that comment was itself drastically cut down from the first version, which pointed out that if you split up a polity into pieces on the grounds that "only people like me should rule over me," then that logic can be used against any polity. The same ideology used to create various nations from the bleeding corpus of the Raj can be used as justification for further splits. But until I find an anti-nationalist scholar who has said that about South Asia in particular, I suppose we're going to have to leave it out. Zora 05:57, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Quite so -- but it still isn't on-point for the article. I don't want to have a situation where people just link whatever they feel like to articles that are only tangentially related. Jkp1187 15:36, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User notice: temporary 3RR block

[edit] Regarding reversions[1] made on November 5, 2006 to United States bombing of Libya

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.
The duration of the block is 3 hours. William M. Connolley 17:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] USAA mod

I agree with your assessment of the section you removed, but your vocabulary is exceeded only by your dirth off tact... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.155.4.175 (talk) 01:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Derth of, even. - Ageekgal 23:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
I stand by what I said. Can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. P.S. It's dearth. Jkp1187 (talk) 17:00, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox on US elections

It is a general rule to only included nominees in the infobox who won electoral votes (not including votes by faithless electors). Otherwise you could have dozens of people in the infobox who only received fractions of one per cent in the popular vote. --Philip Stevens (talk) 18:09, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Wikipedia does not have firm rules and I wouldn't like to put that rule in stone as one year a nominee might get 50 states, like what almost happened in 1984 and 1972. All I can say is, I created the infobox and User:Cardsplayer4life added it to the US election pages, neither of us added nominees who hadn't won electoral votes. For me, this was because only six people can fit into the infobox, often more than that run for president, and I didn't want to be biased against some of the smaller parties. Also, in order to avoid the infobox getting any bigger than it was already, some criteria had to be found to enable a nominee to go into the infobox and winning electoral votes seemed to be the best option. --Philip Stevens (talk) 18:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)