User talk:John Spikowski/Archive July 2006 - July 2007

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please post your comments and questions here. John Spikowski 17:41, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Request for Comment (RfC) at List of mind mapping software

Please see:

The version with footnoted references that people are referring to is at this revision:

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Lists

Hi. Please join Wikipedia:WikiProject Lists.

User WPLISTS
This user is a participant of WikiProject Lists

A list of participants can be found at Category:WikiProject Lists participants.

To add yourself to the project add the following to your userpage.

[[Category:WikiProject Lists participants|{{subst:PAGENAME}}]]

Or, if you wish to use the userbox, add {{User WPLISTS}} to your user page instead as it includes the above wikicode. --Timeshifter 09:56, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

  • I would like to only be involved in the panorama based pages due to the limited amount of time I have to spawn these pages. If you could cover my back and offer your guidance like on the Panorama Stitchers, Viewers and Utilities page, that would be great! John Spikowski 10:01, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
OK. Maybe you can just add your name to the member list for now. It can give you some more authority when defending your various pages, or other pages you comment on. And you might ask others to join too. We editors of list/chart articles need to stick together. Lots of them are put up for deletion. See: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists. I watchlist it to see if anything especially important to me is being put up for review.
I don't remember at this moment how I came upon the deletion review on your article. So if people can keep an eye out for useful list/chart pages, and pass on the word at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lists if there is an attempt to delete any of the more useful ones, then we can keep the damage down to a minimum. Some list/chart pages aren't worth defending. --Timeshifter 11:15, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Sounds like a good idea. I'll add my name to the list. John Spikowski 18:28, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Logo PanoTools.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Logo PanoTools.gif. 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 02:46, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

BetacommandBot, This is MY TALK PAGE. Many of the other talk pages have user related graphics that are specific to them. I declared the image as a logo as the license type following the Wikipedia rule in their use. I don't have to use this image anywhere else then my talk page to validate it. John Spikowski 07:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, criteria #9 of Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria policy states the following:
9. Restrictions on location. Non-free content is used only in the article namespace; it is never used on templates (including stub templates and navigation boxes) or on user pages.
Because the non-free image is used only in a restricted location, it is considered a failed non-free image and will more than likely be removed. If you would like to keep it in your user page, I would suggest opening the image license to completely free use (which means commercially also). For the mean time, it needs to be removed from the user page until the license is updated. Roguegeek (talk) 22:30, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

What's the point of having a logo class restricted license if you can't use it? John Spikowski 22:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think they intended logos uploaded here to be used in conjunction with the subject of the article that relate to just like Image:BMW Logo.svg to BMW or Image:Canon logo.svg to Canon (company). Not sure of the specific reasons in which the policy was intended for, but I, personally, can't see any other place they would be used that wouldn't somehow deal with promotion. Might want to clarify this with someone who has a greater understanding of this policy because I could very well be incorrect. Roguegeek (talk) 02:32, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

What upsets me is that you delete my logo on my talk page without getting a consensus of fact and policy. I'm sure others would be upset if they had images removed from their talk pages. I'm really amazed anything ever gets submitted to the Wikipedia. I noticed the Kawasaki_Ninja_ZX-6R pics on your talk page and used on a promotional page for Kawasaki. I post the logo to a non-profit panorama group and you accuse me of posting promotional images?

John Spikowski 05:07, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not so sure this is a matter of getting consensus since it very clearly states non-free images are not allowed on user pages. I'm also not understanding the Kawasaki_Ninja_ZX-6R example you use. Yes, I do have those images on my talk page. I am the author of those images on Commons and have them listed as completely free-use. Free-use images are allowed on talk pages. Roguegeek (talk) 11:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
One more point: My understanding of the policy is not in question. Non-free images are not allowed on user pages, period. The image in question is not allowed on user pages. The reasoning behind it is something of a broader view that is best answered by several editors, which I hope is something you seek. Roguegeek (talk) 11:46, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
(Take 2) What's the point of having a logo class restricted license if you can't use it?
Copyrighted This is a logo of an organization, item, or event, and is protected by copyright and/or trademark. It is believed that the use of low-resolution images on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, of logos for certain uses involving identification and critical commentary may qualify as fair use under United States copyright law. Any other uses of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement. Certain commercial use of this image may also be trademark infringement. See Wikipedia:Non-free content and Wikipedia:Logos.

This tag must have an accompanying fair use rationale which must be unique to the usage of THIS image in each article in which it is used. You must also give the source and copyright information for all fair-use images uploaded.

Use of the logo here does not imply endorsement of the organization by Wikipedia or the Wikimedia Foundation, nor vice versa.

John Spikowski 13:59, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi John, please do not use fair use images on user space, it is against policy, or to be exact the point 9 on that page

Restrictions on location. Non-free content is used only in the article namespace; it is never used on templates (including stub templates and navigation boxes) or on user pages.

Just so you know, putting fair use images back on user pages despite being warned not to has meant users have been blocked in the past, so it is best to leave it be and discuss it at the fair use page first. Cheers, Localzuk(talk) 16:41, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Also, to clarify - it is to do with the license of the image. The images of Kowasaki's you mention above are all free images - they can be used for any purpose.-Localzuk(talk) 16:43, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Logo PanoTools.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Logo PanoTools.gif. 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 07:06, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I understand the orphan concept but the logo is used on my TALK PAGE and therefor not orphaned. Why are you guys picking on my TALK PAGE ??? I have seen some really radical TALK PAGES with personal images that are not sharable here on Wikipedia. Once again, I have satisfied all the Wikipedia requirements and this is nothing but harassment. John Spikowski 08:04, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm responding to a fu*king BOT. Editing on the Wikipedia is like walking through a mine field. John Spikowski 08:14, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tables

I know little about tables. I sometimes see tables I like, and then try to decipher the main code at the top. Sometimes, I succeed, but I don't really know what it means. Please see Help:Table and

Those are a couple table help pages I have bookmarked. There are probably many more help pages for tables. Maybe try a google search for wikitables, wikipedia tables, etc..--Timeshifter 14:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I just bookmarked that page. --Timeshifter 20:19, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Panoramic tripod head

Hi. I am not an admin. And I don't know anything about the subject. So I don't think I can be much help. I suggest logging in for all your edits if possible. Anonymous edits get much less respect on wikipedia. --Timeshifter 08:16, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Panoramic tripod head and article ownership

You do not own the article Panoramic tripod head or any other, and your insistence that the page must stay the way you want it is unsupported by Wikipedia policy or practice. Your attempt to simply redirect the page to your website when you couldn't have it your way is especially telling. Editors are claiming also that much of the text inside the table is lifted straight from manufacturers' web sites; this is both arguably a copyright violation as well as poor ethically and is in any case unsuitable for Wikipedia.

Please reconsider your behaviour here.

It is also not acceptable to insist your version has consensus when it is a consensus of one (you). Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 20:33, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Do not blank a page because you are disputing its content. Further such behavior may result in your being blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please reconsider your behavior. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 20:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

This format of this page was discussed in detail over a month ago. It is based on the same format as Panorama stitchers, viewers and utilities yet not a word about that page has come up. John Spikowski 20:43, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Huh? So all the comments myself, and User:Requestion made about the page are 'not a word'? *confused*.-Localzuk(talk) 20:48, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
That page is also questionable, IMO. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 20:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


[edit] PanoTools wiki site map.

Hi. I don't see a way to contact you on your PanoTools wiki, http://www.panotools.info, and so I am leaving this note on your talk page here. I did not see a way to quickly leave a note on your forum there either. There is no anonymous posting. And even if I registered for the forum, there is no general forum where I could post this request.

  • The PanoTools BLOG is a good way to comment on the site if not a PanoTools forum member. There are a few threads started there on the wiki and site layout. John Spikowski 19:47, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

When I go to your PanoTools home page, http://www.panotools.info, it it hard to navigate the site for newbies to the site such as me. I suggest linking to, or better yet, transcluding, the main-page navigational info to the home page too. I am talking about this main page:

There is no way to get to that site-map page from the home page.

OK. I now see that the "wiki" link on the home page is what leads to the site-map page. I suggest changing that link label to "wiki site map." --Timeshifter 16:41, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Timeshifter, I have my e-mail address on the wiki user page and in the footer of the home page. It's support@panotools.info if you would still like to e-mail me. I changed the wiki home page to using icons to point to the different sections of the current formatted wiki. You are right on when you say the navigation of the PanoTools wiki is a mess. I have been bitching about this for years and the old editors didn't seem to care and treated it like a place to put post-it notes on a cork board. I'm doing a make-over of the wiki to solve this problem and being careful not to break the thousands of indexes in the search engines pointing to it. The wiki is about 75% of the site's activity. I just upgraded it to the latest version of Mediawiki now that I'm running php5. The upgrade to php5 wasn't as painful as I thought it was going to be and most everything I had in php apps. worked fine. I still have a issue with phpdig and regular expressions but it's minor and I should have it worked out soon. Thanks for all your support and help over these last few months getting anything to stick here on the Wikipedia. John Spikowski 19:28, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

OK. I see the email address link at the bottom of the home page at http://www.panotools.info . But I think it is missing on this page?:
http://www.panotools.info/mediawiki/index.php?title=Main_Page&action=edit
For someone who does not have a login name, it does not give the email address necessary to request becoming a user. Logout and see what I mean.

You have to log in to edit pages.

Please send an e-mail to support at this URL along with your full name for a wiki editing account.

Return to Main Page

As you can see, it instruct the user to send an e-mail to support at the sites URL which is panotools.info

John Spikowski 20:25, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

You have to think like a newbie. I have several websites myself, and I could not figure out what that sentence meant. My first instinct was to look for a clickable email link under "support". In the form of mailto:support@panotools.info . Like the one under "Administrative support" on the home page. When I did not see it, I assumed you had not gotten around to adding it yet. I had no clue what you meant by "this URL." If you are trying to use a disguised email address (in order to avoid spambot harvesters), a common address form to use is support(at)panotools.info --Timeshifter 20:41, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
  • I changed the system message to now use a link to pop the e-mail client. Thanks ! John Spikowski 21:01, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Perfect. Especially with the subject line built in. I suggest not asking for anything other than an email address. A lot of us prefer to remain anonymous. The email address is enough. And I suggest letting people know on that page that the email address remains anonymous also, unless they choose to allow people to contact them via email, and not just by their user talk pages. I have participated in many forums, and those that only require an email address get a lot more participation. Especially if the email address remains hidden from everybody except the site admins. My main email does not use my real name. People don't want their bosses, coworkers, and relatives watching over their shoulders. :) --Timeshifter 22:30, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
I see the icons on the main page:
http://www.panotools.info/mediawiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
But that is not the problem for many newbies to the site. I frequently drill down to the home page of a site by removing most of the URL of whatever page I am on. I leave only the domain name of the URL. For your site that would be http://www.panotools.info
Then I look for a site map or other navigation. It is not intuitive where to find the site map on your home page. There is a "site navigation" link, but it does not help. --Timeshifter 19:58, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
  • The Site Map page on the PanoTools wiki is my next project. This is a key page and needs a much better job done then how it's currently presented. I'm thinking of doing this page in a table of contents format to try and clean the wiki up and make it easier to use. I'll then try to standardize pages so they are consistent. John Spikowski 20:04, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
That would be great, but that is not the main problem for me. The problem is no easy-to-find site map link on the home page. Think like a newbie!! :) --Timeshifter 20:41, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
  • The second option on the site navigation menu after Home is the Wiki. (are we talking about blind newbie's?) John Spikowski 20:50, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
"Wiki" does not mean "site map". It means wiki. We are talking about blind webmasters who aren't thinking like a newbie to your site. I have had the same problem many times over the years with my websites. Just today in fact someone suggested much clearer instructions for a certain part of a site of mine. --Timeshifter 22:23, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
I had a "site map" feature but it didn't get much action. The wiki is just one of the many features the site offers. Based on the stats, I don't think folks are having any problem finding it. John Spikowski 00:14, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
What are the "many features the site offers"? And how does one find them? Hey, I am trying to help out here. One of the reasons you get such flack at wikipedia is your unthinking combative replies. Obviously, I was having difficulty finding the features of your site. But hey, I can take a hint. I am outta here. Just like my ventures on a site,... if I don't find what I want in a few seconds, I usually try elsewhere at easier sites before coming back. And those other sites usually get many, many more hits.
And I get site stats for my site, too. Broken down by page, date, weeks, months, years, etc.. I have watched what increases hits to various pages and sections of the site. I pay attention to what people like, and what they write to me. And if it is easy to accommodate them, I do. --Timeshifter 00:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
I wasn't trying to be combative and I have taken many of your suggestion and applied them. The site has a forum, multiple news features, blog and a wiki. A site map to me means a map of the entire site not just the wiki. When the group split, the wiki was left in a mess by a couple primary editors. The forked version is even worst with everything but the kitchen sink included. I haven't seen any content added by Carl, Thomas and others of the panorama community, just complaints and personal attacks on the discussion and talk pages. I'm done here and spending my time on the PanoTools wiki where I don't have to put up with petty BS from those that stumble on the page after having a bad day and blank the hell out of it. John Spikowski 03:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)