User talk:Josephf

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

contributions


06/10/2008 15:33 2,407,152 articles on Wikipedia (English)


Welcome!

Hello, Josephf, 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:Where to ask a question, 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! , HKT 6 July 2005 16:09 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] User page

Hello! I'd advise you to put something (anything) on your user page. It makes your username show up in blue. Somehow, this may make some people less wary of your edits. HKT 6 July 2005 16:12 (UTC)

[edit] Questions

Thanks for asking! First of all, signing your name can be done by typing 4 tildes (i.e., ~~~~) after your posts. This is appropriate everywhere except on edits to articles. Basically, if you're airing your opinions about something on a talk page or vote page, sign your name. Secondly, you can start your user page by clicking on the red tab above (that says "user page"). This will allow you to access this page (and, for starters, to create the page). Instructions are given along the way. Thirdly, red letters mean a page that is currently non-existent, while blue means that the page exists. Either way, clicking on those colored letters leads to that page. If you have any more questions, feel free to ask. HKT 6 July 2005 17:35 (UTC)

[edit] Maimonides

Hello, I wonder if you could explain your edit on the Maimonides page? How many medieval Jewish philosophers were there who influenced the non-Jewish world? It seems to me that "a few" is synonymous with "various." Thank you, Yoninah 08:28, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Seventh Party System

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Seventh Party System, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree, discuss the issues raised at Talk:Seventh Party System. If you remove the {{dated prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Fram 07:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I've put the reason in the 'Edit summary' comment when removing the template. Thanks, Joseph 17:52, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mark V. Hurd

Your last edit makes it sounds like Mark Hurd was Chairman of HP (in addition to his other roles) since 1 June 2005 which is not true. Please clarify the text.

[edit] Sixth Party system

I have no idea what happened to the article. I had not nominated it for deletion (either through speedy deletion, ProD or AfD), and had not noticed any one else doing so (but I didn not have the article on my watch list). You can always ask about it at WP:DRV, I suppose. I did not feel the need to have this article (as you well know), but I have not taken any action to get rid of it. Sorry I can't help you any further! 11:58, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

The article was in fact deleted through the WP:PROD system. Since I saw that you asked for it to be undeleted, I have restored it. The article is at Sixth Party System. Sjakkalle (Check!) 14:54, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Disappeared again after having just survived its AfD. Go figure. Joseph 19:06, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[1] appears to explain the situation. The long and short is "not my doing, and I don't really have any investment in the outcome besides a general distaste for DRV." Phil Sandifer 19:51, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

It does not seem to have, however current practice is to defer to DRV consensus if it chooses to uphold out-of-process deletions. Phil Sandifer 21:26, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Natan Slifkin

I see you are also interested in Natan Slifkin. Please review these articles, because I have run up against an intransigent editor:

Perhaps you could also review the changes the same editor has made to Natan Slifkin. He does not come from the Jewish perspective, and he seems to be following me around and looking for ways to harass me. --Metzenberg 05:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image source problem with Image:BrooklynHistorical.gif

Image Copyright problem

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:BrooklynHistorical.gif. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:08, 13 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 22:08, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requested moves

I noticed your requested move, and would like to point you that there is a much faster alternative for making that move. Requested moves is quite backlogged, and it can take a while before an administrator gets to it. (days or even longer). If you tag the required destination with {{db-housekeeping}}, and leave a short note on the talkpage, it should be deleted in a matter of minutes, and you can make the actual move yourself. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 16:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Microsoft Lda.

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Microsoft Lda., 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 Microsoft Lda.. KurtRaschke (talk) 17:39, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually this company, the subject of this article, is unrelated to Microsoft Corporation. It just happens to have the same name (and has been using it first in Portugal, as the article discusses.) Joseph (talk) 03:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits to Costco

Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to Costco. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. --Matt (talk) 22:13, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Which countries copyright laws are applicable? And how is it determined if information is under copyright in the respective jurisdiction? Thanks! Joseph (talk) 22:31, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
At the very least, the United States' laws are applicable. By default, I'd treat everything as copyrighted, and look for exceptions based on age or publisher. Even if something is out of copyright, you should probably attribute the source. You should familiarize yourself with WP:COPY. Cheers --Matt (talk) 23:14, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks again Matt. I'll take a look at WP:COPY. Although regarding your point, Wikipedia seems to pride itself on being "international" and not biased to any specific country. So does the United States copyright laws apply to Wikipedia any more than all the other English speaking countries that utilize the English Wikipedia? Joseph (talk) 23:23, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia's US based. While it is international (check out WP:ENGVAR for an endorsement that US English isn't the preferred Wikipedia English), my understanding is that because the servers and company are US based, at a minimum they'll have to follow US laws. I am not a lawyer though, and I'm not speaking for Wikipedia. Check out the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works - I believe much of the world tries to find common ground with respect to copyright. --Matt (talk) 23:33, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Payot

Just to clarify, "The Brisk movement, which is distinctive to Hasidic Judaism" (your wording) means the opposite of "The Brisk movement, which is in distinct opposition to Hasidic Judaism" (original wording). "Distinctive to" means "special to", or "a special part of". But according to Brisk yeshivas and methods, Brisk is not Hasidic. "Distinctive from" or "distinct from" maintains the original meaning, so I've changed it to that. -kotra (talk) 22:09, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Idt logo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Idt logo.gif. 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) 23:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I have addressed your concern. Joseph (talk) 15:45, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

For edit-warring and use of deceptive edit summaries on Kosovo. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

This was not my intention, and I apologize if it appeared as so to you. Can you explain what you are referring to, as I did not intend to, nor am I aware of either violating the 3-revert rule or edit warring. (And can I ask that you reverse this, and I will attempt to be careful herein on?) Thanks Joseph (talk) 19:10, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, you reverted "is a landlocked republic" to "is a landlocked region" (or something to that effect) three times in a row. Without clearly marking it as a revert (edit summary "rewording" is hardly informative). Under the particular hot conditions at Kosovo right now, that's clearly edit-warring, in my book. Would you be willing to stay away from the dispute for a while if unblocked? Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response. I reworded the sentence, and replaced the word republic with region, as I thought that was a more npov, and it immediately stated afterwards it being a republic. Additionally after I reworded it I reverted it once after another edit changed it back. And after that editor changed it back again with an edit summary that indicated his objection to my original edit was the usage of the term de facto I re-did my edit without using that term (de facto). So after my original edit I had reverted it back once and then re-instated again it with a slightly reworded edit. So I don't think it was reverted three times by any account. As far the wording, I thought rewording sufficiently explained what I was trying to do, but apologize if that was not sufficiently clear. In any event, just to put this unpleasantness behind, I'd be more than happy to stay away from that article and dispute for a while (say, two days? or another period you may suggest). Joseph (talk) 19:51, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Okay, fair enough. Thanks for your cooperation. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:55, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. Joseph (talk) 19:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Idt logo.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Idt logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:05, 6 March 2008 (UTC)