User talk:Kevin Baas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Archives are made when this page gets way too long,
but not past the oldest active/recently active discussion.

Contents

[edit] NSA warrantless surveillance controversy

As you can see, this article has recently gotten active again, with new editors. Just a heads up to someone who's been active there in the past. As I commented on the talk page there "I'm rather busy right now, so for the most part I'm probably going to have to leave it to other people who have been involved with this article to correct/challenge/congratulate in whatever mixture." Crust 22:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Iraq war

Hi Kevin, it's been a while - I hope you're doing well.

Thanks for your comment on the Iraq war infobox-gate.[1] I don't want to misinterpret you, but is it ok if I list you as a "support" for my proposed compromise, at least as a "everybody holds their nose and settles" compromise? Let me know, TheronJ 08:59, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Images listed for deletion

Some of your images or media files have been listed for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion if you are interested in preserving them.

  • Image:Prob-add1.jpg
  • Image:Prob-add2.jpg
  • Image:Prob-mul2.jpg

Thank you. —Remember the dot (t) 06:29, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

(replying to the message on my talk page) - You can ask for these images to be speedily deleted by replacing {{ifd}} with {{db-author}} on the image description pages. Once you've done that, make sure to go to Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2007 February 9 and leave a note under these images stating that you have requested their deletion. —Remember the dot (t) 21:53, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Linkimage

Template:Linkimage has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 23:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stablepedia

Thanks a lot for your comment regarding Stablepedia on Wikipedia talk:Stable versions. I have noticed your formula, and i believe it is quite interesting and can work pretty well. I plan to implement a modified version of it and test the results, and if the the results are good enough, i will use it on Stablepedia. Of course, i will not forget to mention you if i eventually use your formula :).

I am glad you like the site, i have added your suggestion on my todo list. The problem is that i am working alone on this project, so implementing all the ideas takes a lot of time, especially that i am also a student.

You said "And I think your site is great. :-)", I am building a kudos page, i was wondering if you would allow me to include it along with your name :).

Thanks ! --Sinan Taifour 17:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Franklin_actual_votes_per_machine.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Franklin_actual_votes_per_machine.gif. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. MECU≈talk 22:14, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Franklin_county_registered_voters.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Franklin_county_registered_voters.gif. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. MECU≈talk 22:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:S_rbturnout.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:S_rbturnout.jpg. I noticed that 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, then 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, then 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-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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 22:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 22:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mathematics CotW

Hey Kevin, I am writing you to let you know that the Mathematics Collaboration of the week(soon to "of the month") is getting an overhaul of sorts and I would encourage you to participate in whatever way you can, i.e. nominate an article, contribute to an article, or sign up to be part of the project. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks--Cronholm144 22:55, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Global perspectives task force

Hi Kevin! I just saw your recent comment on the Iraq, which led me to take a look at your really impressive work across Wikipedia. Kudos. I especially appreciate some of your ruminations on neutrality :-) Anyways, I thought you might be interested in the newly formed global perspectives task force, which is part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias. The basic idea of the task force is to try to ensure that key articles reflect a truly global perspective, especially in terms of the sources on which the articles rely. Based on the work you have done on the site, this seemed up your alley, so I wanted to invite you to take a look at the project page and, if you're interested, add your name to the list of participants. It would be great to have someone with your outstanding commitment to Wikipedia involved. Cheers! --Mackabean 21:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Replaceable fair use Image:Franklin county registered voters.gif

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Franklin county registered voters.gif. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot (talk) 22:30, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

replaced. Kevin Baastalk 00:54, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please help with Wikipedia:Conspiracy theory titles

I would appreciate any help you could provide with the new Wikipedia:Conspiracy theory titles proposal/essay and also over on wiktionary's definition of "conspiracy theory" here. zen master T 23:08, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] your image on wikinews

If you don't mind, could you slap some free copyright tag on n:Image:Good2 color crop.jpg. Thanks, happy editing. Bawolff 22:52, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FNC & Pals

Hey Kevin... I applaud your levelheadedness and skillful blend of prose and logic during the (considerable) debates always ongoing at the Fox News Channel article. I'm sure you've seen that I've been working for quite a while to keep the article honest and balanced, and I appreciate that I have a well-spoken editor who seems to strive for the same. Bravo! /Blaxthos 14:06, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:User categories for discussion on -isms

Hi. A user category that you are in has been proposed for deletion at Wikipedia:User categories for discussion. You are welcome to comment. Cheers! bd2412 T 02:14, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Replaceable fair use Image:Exit poll small florida.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Exit poll small florida.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot (talk) 19:01, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cold fusion mediation

You are named as a party at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Cold fusion. Please either agree to mediation, or strike your name from the list of parties. MigFP (talk) 05:46, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Request for mediation accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party has been accepted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Cold fusion.
For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 19:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
I have accepted the mediation case regarding Cold fusion. Can you provide a brief summary of your view points regarding the issue here? Thanks, Seicer (talk) (contribs) 02:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CMNS

I filed a request for unprotection that you might want to keep an eye on, please. MigFP (talk) 03:32, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Franklin voting machines2.gif

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Franklin voting machines2.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 17:24, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your comments in WP:AN3RR

Regarding your comments here, could I suggest that mundane editorial disagreements are most likely to resolve quickly and productively when editors observe the following:

  • Remain polite per WP:Civility.
  • Solicit feedback and ask questions.
  • Keep the discussion focused. Concentrate on a small set of related matters and resolve them to the satisfaction of all parties.
  • Focus on the subject rather than on the personalities of the editors.
  • Assume good faith of other editors.

I hope you find this reminder helpful. --Ronz (talk) 19:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Whatever. You could've just said you though my comment uncivil. I admit that it was and I'm sorry. I crossed it off. I find the way the discussion is going on the fractal compression talk page a little disappointing, and the aggressive editing of the article on controversial matters while that material is being discussed on the talk page is not helpful. Kevin Baastalk 19:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! I've been trying to help with the article for some time now. I've given the editors there a great deal of leeway, and Editor5435‎ has taken advantage of it. --Ronz (talk) 19:44, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
I think people need to work on dispute resolution, and people need to work on not aggravating an existing dispute. And it seems like you are throwing all the blame on Editor5435, which is completely unfair. Editor5435 is clearly getting pretty upset, and that's certainly not helpful. But his frustrations do not come from thin air. My frustrations with interacting with other editors on the fractal compression article can probably be deduced from looking at the talk page. From my experience, Spot has not been very cooperative or easy to talk with. I hope you can see that things are not all that black-and-white. In any case, I hope that things cool down on the talk page and we can find something that we can cooperate respectfully and constructively on. Kevin Baastalk 19:52, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
"But his frustrations do not come from thin air." Correct, they come from what appears to be willfully ignoring Wikipedia policies and guidelines, a conflict of interest, and an inability to cooperate with others. Simply look at his editing as User:Technodo. I gave him plenty of chances as Editor5435, not knowing that he had edited earlier as Technodo. --Ronz (talk) 01:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
This does not demonstrate comprehension of what I wrote. It is, to the contrary, quite opinionated and polarizing. Kevin Baastalk 15:28, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Then let me be clear. He's taken advantage of my help. I regret not being more careful with him from the start. I will not make the same mistake with him again. --Ronz (talk) 02:29, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit]  :-)

WP:DFTT. :-) /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 17:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Dude, seriously. I have mad respect for your willingness to assume good faith, but we're being trolled. Read this (and this). /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 21:24, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ANI

Please take a moment to comment here, if you're comfortable. Time sensitive. /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 11:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Talk page for Fox News

Thank you for using the more neutral label "section break." Urzatron (talk) 17:17, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

ya, originally i was just trying to think of a brief title to summarize instead of being completely generic. I wasn't thinking you'd take offense to it; that is, it wasn't my intention. i was just trying to make it easier to edit as the section had grown exceedingly long. i see now that the title was very poorly choosen. and i apologize for the mistake. Kevin Baastalk 18:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
No harm done, then! :) Urzatron (talk) 18:58, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Election controversy articles

What are your thoughts about how to proceed? I've told David Gerard that I consider his AfD close improper. Nevertheless, I don't know whether an immediate DRV is the best course. You'll find relevant discussions at User talk:David Gerard#Your close of the AfD on election controversy articles, Talk:2004 United States election voting controversies#potential merge information to include, and Talk:2004 United States election voting controversies#How to merge. I'm concerned that some of the editors who favored total deletion will be going ahead with a de facto deletion, without consensus. JamesMLane t c 17:38, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what the result of the AfD was. It sounds from what you write that it was merge. Last I checked, there clearly wasn't consensus for this. I don't know what DRV is, but if it was closed without a true consensus with something other than status quo than I would say some kind of appeal is in order, for as far as I understand that would constitute a policy violation. If it's just merging the smaller summary article into the larger one, I'd say that's fine - it's redundant anyways, and I don't think anyone really read it. As regards editors favoring total deletion, I share your concern -- the fact that their ideal solution is so extreme and anti-historical doesn't exactly nurture a lot of faith in their prudence and moderation. Problem is, I'm quite annoyed right now and I have little patience left for dealing with this. Maybe some time later I'll take a look at things. (Again, if the result is merging the smaller summary into the larger one, that seems to me like a fine solution.) In the meantime, I wish you luck. Kevin Baastalk 21:42, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your response. The AfD close was to delete all the articles except 2004 United States election voting controversies (the summary article), and merge information into that article.
I obviously don't think the summary article was redundant. I started it because I thought there should be a summary for readers who didn't want to wade through what had become a very sprawling main article. Still, this AfD close is likely to produce a result that you and I both oppose. The pro-deletion faction will try to eliminate most or all of the information that was in the main article and all the daughter articles. If, however, even a small portion of that information makes it into what was the summary article, then that article will cease to be useful as a summary.
DRV is deletion review. It is indeed a way to appeal an improper deletion. I was half-expecting that you'd bring this close to DRV. The practical problem is that if no one starts a DRV, and if the merger of content is left to PhilSandifer, Bonewah, and R. fiend (who've all been participating in the discussion at Talk:2004 United States election voting controversies), then a huge amount of information will be lost. I can understand your lack of patience, though. JamesMLane t c 01:01, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
That outcome is outright ridiculous. Definitely take it to DRV. Nobody in their right mind would argue that that was the consensus. Kevin Baastalk 14:16, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikinews

I followed your remark at Categorization re dynamic category listing at Wikinews but found I was not up to finding anything dynamic. Could you elaborate? -- roundhouse0 (talk) 14:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Basically, DPL's are a way to transclude categories into any article as a sorted list. DPL's have been augmented with features that make them more versatile and powerful, such as category intersection, list style (bulleted, numbered, etc.), and sort criteria (alphabetical, date added, etc.).
Every section on any of those pages - w/the header and the list of dates and articles, is a dynamic page list(DPL). The list of dates and articles is the DPL. It's "dynamic" because when a new page is added to the category-intersection it's in, it will automatically be added to all the corresponding DPL's, showing up at the top of them (if it's sorted by date added, descending), with the corresponding date it was added (if that option is enabled).
As to why it's called "Dynamic Page List", a little history may be enlightening: originally, every time an article was created, an entry for it had to be manually created in the newsroom, and every time it was ready for publishing, it had to be manually added to the main page. This was a lot of unneccesary work, so DPL's were invented and augmented to perform this task automatically. With the use of DPL's and article status tags (such as template:develop), the newsroom became almost fully automated.
An example for wikipedia might be RFC's. If DPL's were used, to RfC an article you'd just have to put it in the RfC category, and it would automatically show up on the rfc'd article list - you wouldn't have to manually add it in.
If you view the source/edit on any of the portal pages you can see how they're instantiated. Most of the content you see on the portals is automatically generated by DPL's. Thus, the pages never require any manual updating. Same goes for the newsroom and the main page. Kevin Baastalk 15:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Changing process in the middle of a poll

Hi Kevin - I appreciate your contribution to the WikiProject assessment poll. I also recognise that several editors have expressed their comments in the form of an "oppose", and understand that you are trying to reflect this view, but changing the rules of play half-way through a discussion is not good practice. I believe that Walkerma, who asked for this poll, is travelling right now, so may be unavailable to revert your edit, but this poll was set up to use approval voting rather than support/oppose, and any change needs to be discussed first, and then the instructions updated accordingly Geometry guy 19:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

My mistake. I thought it was just a mistake. If it's not reverted already I'll self-revert. Thanks for the heads-up. Kevin Baastalk 20:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
No problem. I reverted and added a mention to the "Further discussion" section, in case there is any appetite for a change in process, but I suspect not. Cheers, Geometry guy 20:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)