User talk:KeithTyler/Archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome message

Jrdioko

[edit] Government Center

Hi Keith -- Excellent article on Government Center -- and congratulations on having it appear on the Main page today! It's great to see another Bostonian working on local articles -- even though I guess you're really from the home of Marshmallow Fluff.

Please feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions about content, procedures, standards, or anything else for that matter.

Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 00:01, May 23, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Re User:Michael

Hey, Keith. Please see User talk:Michael/ban for discussion on reverting all of Michael's edits. RickK 21:55, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] COX-2 selective inhibitor

What is your source for this article? KeithTyler 17:01, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

Hi. I wrote it myself, as a review, based on the references listed at the bottom. Gzuckier 14:29, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] re: Bradley Amendment

Good evening, KeithTyler. On 25 Aug, you voted to delete the article about the Bradley Amendment because it was a POV rant. Even though the discussion period has run out, no one's acted on that thread yet. I've completely rewritten the article. I'd appreciate it if you'd take a read through and see if it's now worthy of a keep. Rossami 01:17, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Tex Markup tests

See User:KeithTyler/TeX_markup_tests

[edit] School years

[edit] Re-directs

You are creating lots of re-directs. To make sure you know this, I created a category for all 13 articles involving a year of education in the United States called Category:Educational years. Any improvements to this category?? 66.245.98.246 23:10, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Education

You are mentioned as the only participant in the Education project called "Wikiproject School Years", yet you haven't made a single edit today. What happened?? 66.32.255.91 15:41, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject:SchoolYears

You are the only participant in the school years project, yet you haven't made a single contribution to it for a full week. What happened?? Did you forget about it?? 66.245.29.53 13:50, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Education Project

This is the first time in no less than 2 weeks when you focused on updating the education project. What happened?? 66.245.74.145 21:50, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Who are you and why are you the WikiProject nazi, and why won't you log in so I know who I am being harasased by? I typically am not interested in responding to anonymous people, especially high-pressure ones! Is there some rule I am violating? Please let me know -- but at least have the courtesy to log in before you do! Thanks, KeithTyler
I'm just trying to make sure you know this. I just felt that you might forget about the projects. My User IP just changes a lot for some reason. What is a nazi?? 66.245.74.145 22:09, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I think I am aware of what I edit and when. Thank you, now unless you plan to contribute to the project, please don't post messages to me again. I have posted a note about the project to all (US at least) school year pages, hopefully that will spur further interest. A project of one person to me is not a project -- the point of a project is to collaborate, not for one person to direct. I don't plan to fill the project solely with my own ideas. To date, you have only been harrassive instead of constructive or contributory and it is not helpful. Bye, KeithTyler

[edit] For curiosity...

Why are you removing sections from your talk page?? Most registered Wikipedians prefer simply to save them in a page titled "Archive1". 66.245.74.145 22:13, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Frankly, after this amount of annoyance I would much prefer not to have a talk page at all. I am deleting sections that I deem not to be useful or relevant to me any longer. If you know of a policy that I should be following that states otherwise, please point it out, otherwise please stop messaging me. - KeithTyler

I am very sorry. 66.245.74.145 22:20, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

In all fairness, I went and reviewed Wikipedia:User page and its section on user_talk pages in response to your question. I feel that deleting a few comments that have little or not content (such as "I responded to you over here"), or minor comments based on discussions elsewhere (such as "Thanks for doing what we talked about over there") are within the spirit of fair stewardship of user talk pages as described in that article. I'm not removing critical comments or even constructive ones with useful content in them.
But besides, anything I do "delete" is available for viewing via the edit history. After all, that is the point of a Wiki, isn't it? - KeithTyler 22:31, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] VfD: Just for clarity

Keith, I'm sorry about being snippy on VfD. You are, of course, entitled to counter a vote of mine. However, Dr.Zen's personal attack certainly poisoned the water. I profoundly disagree with your view of what VfD does. I don't think it is incumbent upon voters to do research: that's the job of authors, and it's the job of Clean Up. An article on VfD is at a deliberative stage. Since all the votes but yours and his were deletes, and all were based on the truly pathetic nature of the article, I don't think I'm very renegade in this. When we do research on a topic to rescue it from VfD, we usually (sorry for the pronoun) make the changes, do the rescue, and then ask everyone to reconsider. Simply being a potential article makes something no different than a white space. Dpbsmith, for example, always amazes me with the way that he will save articles from VfD, but note that he never utters a word about how we all ought to vote keep until after he has done the research and made the article passable. It would be perfect if we all did as he does, but, barring that, the least we can do is avoid taunting one another. I had not thought you had. Dr.Zen absolutely had. My ill-tempered remarks were meant in reply to those. Apologies if you were caught in the cross-fire. I assume you hadn't invited Dr.Zen's personal attack on me, so you shouldn't have, as we sometimes say, "gotten any on you" when the splatter followed. Geogre 03:02, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

  • The alignment of bullets suggested that your comment was in response to mine. Anyway: Fundamentally I think that if one is not familiar with the subject, the default action should not be to delete. I do think that a lot of VfDers rush to delete when cleanup should be tried first. If it's a obscure topic, and a bad article, then deletion is probably warranted. But a bad article on a valid topic should be pushed towards improvement instead of destruction. And IMO one should not rely solely on their own horizons (or on those with similar horizons to themselves) to determine obscurity. Regards, [[User:KeithTyler|Keith D. Tyler [flame]]] 19:49, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Jscott

Glad you appreciated it :) ~leif ☺ HELO 01:40, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Damn. I used to have to go to Livejournal for this much drama and argument. I wonder if that's Jason's plan. - [[User:KeithTyler|Keith D. Tyler [flame]]]

[edit] Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

See my user page for my response. – Ram-Man (comment) (talk)[[]] 19:24, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)
I've responded again on my page to your comments, but based on the many comments on my page, it seems like you've probably already read them and understand what we are discussing. RM 13:49, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Question

Hi. I've seen your comments on a couple of the discussion pages I've been on, and I'm wondering if there might be something I should know about Samboy. Is he some sort of official monitor? He's really starting to creep me out.--Centauri 04:42, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)