User talk:Muchosucko/Archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Welcome!

Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:33, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Boston Latin School

No, though I'm from the other Boston (the real one, as we like to think of it). My interest is just as a Wikipedia editor (as I remember, I came across the article while patrolling New Pages, butI might be wrong).

By the way, it took me a little while to find you — always 'sign' your messages with four tildes (see above), it makes it much easier to reply. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:56, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dhritiman Das

If you come across inappropriate pages again, could you please tag them for speedy deletion using {{db|your reason}}. Blanking the page doesn't get rid of it entirely and it makes it harder to find. - Mgm|^(talk) June 28, 2005 09:10 (UTC)

• Thank you very much for following up on my advise. Just one more thing: could you please put deletion templates on top of the article. Only stub tags should go at the bottom. - Mgm|^(talk) June 28, 2005 10:11 (UTC)

[edit] 206.165.83.203

What did you base that comment on, and why did you tell me? - Mgm|^(talk) June 28, 2005 10:20 (UTC)

• Oh, how did I ever miss that. Always include diffs if you can. Diffs are pages showing differences between different revisions. I've sent the anon a warning. Feel free to let me know if he continues. (Now he can't claim he didn't know he was wrong) - Mgm|^(talk) June 28, 2005 10:27 (UTC)

[edit] English Electric Lightning

Muchosucko, I can't understand why you reverted my Lightning pic to the version by Ian Dunster. Ian is well-meaning but made a mess of the pic. I accept that the thumbnail looks OK but just compare the large versions. His version has a most unpleasant blocky (pixellated) look under the wing. Please don't revert back. If you tell me you can't see the blockiness of Ian's effort I'll put a side by side comparison here - Adrian Pingstone 28 June 2005 16:20 (UTC)

• Many thanks for such a graceful apology on my Talk Page. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 29 June 2005 12:45 (UTC)

[edit] About 212.85.15.77

Hello, Muchosucko! I often get connected to the internet in public libraries in London and Essex. Now it is the third time that I get into en.wikipedia and find a "you've got new messages" banner without having logged using my nickname. In all the occasions with a similar warning to this. IP 212.85.15.77 is in East Ham Library (London E6), I am writing from it right now (computer number 5) and I am afraid that many different people usually get connected here. If the trouble persist I think you should block it but just for a while. I have got a question, though: could I log on wikipedia with my nickname even if the IP is blocked? -Piolinfax 4 July 2005 09:28 (UTC)

My understanding is that you can't edit, because I've heard of people who weren't able to edit under their user names because of an IP block that had accidentally affected them (for instance, if they were using AOL). I can't say for sure, though. Presumably you can still log in. Everyking 4 July 2005 09:58 (UTC)

Thanx everybody for the answer :). If I happen to log on and not being able to edit, I will at least the reason. Anyway, I lately don't edit much in es.wikipedia when in London so I don't think it'll affect me hard. Thanx once again! -Piolinfax 8 July 2005 18:25 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Fiery knight.JPG

I'm sorry, I can't find the reason you removed the Image:Fiery knight.JPG image from IFD. Is there reason? The picture was taken in 1944 Burma with swastikas everywhere. It is titled "Fiery Knight." The other picture on his user page was also listed as 1944 Burma with more swastikas under the title, "Swastika Knights." I don't think the references are subtle. Yes, it is his user page, but this is not his private website. Wikipedia and a public shared resource that must submit to standards of decorum. I am not aware of User:Curtsurly publicly defending the pictures in any way. I may be mistaken.--Muchosucko 7 July 2005 15:09 (UTC)

I don't see any swastikas at Image:Fiery knight.JPG. I didn't delete the picture because there was an objection; see Image talk:Fiery knight.JPG. If you think the image is a copyright violation, feel free to list it at WP:PUI. dbenbenn | talk 7 July 2005 15:17 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Skheadshot.jpg

Where has King said that Image:Skheadshot.jpg is a promotional picture, please? Could you cite a source for this statement? Nothing of the kind is said on the page of King's site where the uplaoder says the picture came from, or if there is I missed it. DES 21:03, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

He didn't. Feel free to remove the tag if you want. The template states "It is believed..." -- so nothing is set in stone here. I just figured, when you put a picture on the open web, under a url with your name in it, you probably use the materials on the website to to sell more books and you'd expect your picture to be copied on the web. If I had the time, I'd type some letter to the webmaster. I think Wikipedia has a template for stuff like this--Muchosucko 21:15, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

The page in question also has a copyright notice. That is a way of saying "don't use these pics without permission" unless there is some explicit text to the contrary. I will be removing that tag. I'll check if any other tag might apply.

FYI when leaving a msg for a user, it is normal to put it on that user's User talk page, not his or her user page. mine is at User talk:DESiegel. DES 21:43, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] chop suey

Please do no vandalize Chop suey. If you want to present Chop suey as an Armenian invention, you must

• Explain how "Chop Suey" was Armenia words
• List a 19 century Armenian Chop Suey menu.
• Reference an article written in the turn of 20th century. Gisling 09:28, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] chop suey revert war

Hi. Please see Wikipedia:3RR, the 3-revert rule, which you have breached several times now on chop suey. Morwen - Talk 16:19, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Well, if you are going to ignore the warning, I have no choice but to block you if you continue. Since indeed, User:Gisling is violating the policy as well I'll see if he responds in a similar way, and block him also. Morwen - Talk 16:22, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Swiss Re

Hi,

I worked as an engineer on the design at concept and scheme stage when the project team was very small.

I was planning a few more additions, including some closeup pictures of the construction stage. My feelings will not be hurt if you tidy up/re-organize, and I'll keep an eye on what you do (you seem to be experienced in these matters...)

A techy insight: Most tall buildings are given lateral stabilty either by a core or by an unbraced (no diagonals) perimeter tube or some combination of the two. This normally means that if they're designed to be just strong enough to resist wind load, they are still too flexible from the point of view of occupant comfort. The primary methods for controlling wind excited accelerations are to increase the stiffness, or increase damping (see tuned/active mass dampers). Swiss re's fully triangulated perimeter structure makes the building sufficiently stiff without having to add extra material over that needed to provide the required strength.

Sorry if I messed up a section - I was a bit confused about which edit links hooked up to which sections. It looks like you didn't like the bit about the sight lines.

Perhaps you'd like to summarize what follows:

the planning process was absolutely crucial to how the building ended up looking.

The site was very special in London because it: 1) needed development 2) was not on any of the "sight lines" - planning guidance requires that new buildings do not obstruct or detract from the view of St. Paul's dome when viewed from a number of locations around London: see http://www3.westminster.gov.uk/udp/adopted/full/chap9/des2.cfm and http://www.skyscrapernews.com/heron.htm 3) had housed the Baltic exchange. I cannot over-emphasize how impressive the interior was before the bomb - this gave the planners extra motivation and leverage.

One of the schemes (with an architect other than Foster's - GMW I think?) involved building a new box building (large floor plates - what the banks want) around a restored exchange. This didn't get any buyers.

At some stage (around the time I got involved), the planners realized that the exchange was unrecoverable, and that they could either (a) live with a derelict site or (b) relax their constraints, and it was indicated that an "architecturally significant" (this is a quote, though who said it escapes me) building would be looked upon favourably. This made the architect's brief much more open, and eliminated the "large, capital efficient box for making money" ideas the client would inevitably have been having.

Another major influence in the project's gestation was Canary Wharf. At the time, the banks and other traditional square mile employers were defecting to Canary Wharf in droves. One reason for this was the availibity of modern large floor plates. The City of London was not approving such buildings, meaning that the firms had to disperse their staff across many sites. The City became aware of the mass defection, and relaxed its opposition to high-rise buildings. Swiss Re's low level plan meets the planning authorities desire to maintain the City of London's traditional "street scape" with relatively narrow streets, without the mass of the tower being too imposing. Like Barclay's City building, you are almost oblivious to the tower's existence in neighbouring streets until you are directly underneath it. Such planning rules/goals are the principal cause of many cities' visual identity - compare central London, Paris, and NY's sky lines and street environments to see this. (As an example, NY's plot ratio and setback rules have had an enormous impact on how it looks.)

[edit] Aristocrats

I reverted your edits because you had made a complete mash out of the article (looked like at least two, possibly three entire replications of the same article). Frankly, it look like the sort of thing we see when vandals are at work. It appears that that was not your intention, and I apologize for any confusion. Kelly Martin 04:52, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Happiness intelligence graph by lisa simpson.jpg

You're probably not Matt Groening or 20th Century Fox so I took the liberty of deleting this screenshot. Thuresson 9 July 2005 01:49 (UTC)

Please note two things about fair use: a) no image is fair use in and off itself. "Fair use" applies to a use of a picture, not to the picture itself, i.e. the same image may be fair use in one context but not usable in another. This is the reason that b) fair use is not acceptable on the commons, because it does not apply here: we are a media database and can not claim fair use. Furthermore, in other coutries "fair use" is not a broad as in the US, we would get a big confusion about which images can be used in which context in which country. So fair use is simply not acceptable on the commons. -- Duesentrieb 08:51, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] msg

1. 1:00pm 4aug2005 (begin time)

1. 6:40pm 4aug2005 (1 tablet oxy)
2. 4:30pm 5aug2005 (1 tablet oxy)

1. 12:01am 6 aug 2005 (1 advil)
2. 7:34am 6 aug 2005 (1 advil)
3. 3:21 pm 6aug2005 (1 advil)
4. 12:25am 7aug2005 (1 advil)
5. 9:56am 7aug2005 (1 advil)
6. 11:00pm 7aug2005 (1 advil)

--Muchosucko 20:35, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] homestead, fl

If you have any more problems, you know where to find me; or, you could try the administrator's noticeboard for incidents, which is a page for reporting such problems. →Raul654 21:25, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Poor taste

Hi, on second thoughts I should have probably used a different wording, but I'm sure you realise how these things come out in the spur on the moment. What I mean to say is that I think you are misguided in your belief that the RfAr is being diverted or drawn to the plight of blacks by some hidden motive. Considering the user in question, her supporters and the context within which the RfAr was made I don't think that it needs to be drawn or diverted at all. This is about a black woman who works on black articles being abusive in a black way to non-blacks for some reason. The whole RfA is centred on black issues -- there is no hidden motive and no secret black cabal. The events have seen themselves appear because that is the only way they could appear. I do not take the surrounding environment mitigates culpability this as an absolute. I feel that all cases should be considered fully, and in a way tailored to the subject of the case, I guess thats where we differ. I don't think that justice (whatever that means on the internet!) can be meted out machine stamp style. I hope this explains my position a bit more fully, sorry if I cause a bit of confusion :) - FrancisTyers 13:27, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Invertedpyramidlouvre4.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Invertedpyramidlouvre4.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 23:57, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Invertedpyramidlouvre1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Invertedpyramidlouvre1.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 23:59, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Invertedpyramidlouvre2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Invertedpyramidlouvre2.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 23:59, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Invertedpyramidlouvre3.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Invertedpyramidlouvre3.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 23:59, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your images

This type of non-commercial permission images are not allowed on Wikipedia. See [1]. -Nv8200p talk 02:11, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Harbin trick further explaination.JPG listed for deletion

—Wknight94 (talk) 02:37, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Negotiations?

I'm currently on the road, with infrequent access to internet. Re. your knowledge on how to patent a magic creation that doesn't contain a new scientific principle (Like Paul Curry's piece) is still of great interest. I've given you several attractive offers, but since they have failed - please, name your own terms. What do you desire in return? Sincerely --TStone 15:49, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gator

Thanks for the "heads up" - I think he's gone in unacceptable hard on Rob and me - Rob was daft enough to answer him back but I would like to find a way to voice my unhappiness at his comments that he can't just delete calling me a "vandal" - any ideas? SOPHIA 21:08, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

For the record, I don;t remember ever working with you but I would love to if you actually edited the page every so often. Also, please don't say such mean and baseless things behind someone's back like that. Very uncool. I work well with anyone who is willing to be civil and work towards a compromised solution. You included. Anytime. No hard feelings.Gator (talk) 21:26, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I fi reverted your comments edits I'm sure it was for a good reason or else someone would have put them back, so that's not fair. Fact is I couldn;t even see when you last were there. I'm sure you've reverted otehr people's edits before, that doesn't mean you're impossible to work with. If you come on my talk page and don't fling pewrsonal inslults a tme I will not blank them. If you look at my page history, you'll see that'ds the first time I've ever had to do that.

Fact is, if your civil and/or willing to compromise,I can work with you. If youmake POV edits, I will delete them. Every time. If I'm wrong,t hen say so on the talk page or hope someoen else sees that, but if you're just going to walk away fuming about it and then throw bombs at me behind my back, then that's just very uncooth. I have no hard feelings, and if you'd like to put your edit back and discuss them I'd be glad to. have a good one.Gator (talk) 21:44, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I've given you an opportuity to present your edits on the Dr.Laura page. Please do so. As for consensus, I see it happen every day where I am involved. See the John Lott page for example. I was able to overcome a great dela ot make some changes there that many agreed on. I'm proud of my work there. When some people purposely ignore consensus and start reverting, (Robsteadman for example) they get blocked for violating the 3RR. He is the one who did wrong here, no one else. Let'snot lose site of that. I look forward to working with you if you're game.Gator (talk)

OHH I remember you now. WOW, what you've said is TOTALLY unfair. You wanted to put in new info without a cite. I aaid to find one and we were quickly able to find one and it's in there right now.....so how did I not work with you??? You got what you wanted after a good discussion...I don't want to say that you "lied" about me...but what you told SOPHIA was not true in the least. I totally worked and compromised with you....not cool dude.Gator (talk)

And I jsut checked and Ithink that was the only edit you made the Dr. Laura page. Wow, if oyu've got issues with me, just say it, but don;t make stuff up about me like that. You told SOPHIA that I was impossible to work with from your experience on the Dr. Laura page, but you only wanted one thing but it needed a ciote and wwe quickly worked it out and you got what you wanted....so...what do I have to apologize for exactly? You owe me an apology...wow...Gator (talk) 22:04, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Alright you've just got personalissues with me adn I can see now (after looking the evidence of our onylcontact with eachotehr) that they're entirely baseless and unfaoir so I'm done here. Please feel free to edit the Dr. Laura page anytime, I have no monopoly over it and your editds, thus far, were fine, they just needed to be surced is all. Hae a good one.Gator (talk) 22:07, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh now I'm a "bully." That's a "personal attack" Bullies callpeople names and I don't remember ever doing that to anyone. Not cool. Once again, if anyone actually looks at what you're talking about they'll see that things went very well between us and you got what you wanted with a good and agreed upon cite. I did nothing wrong and was very civil with you. You're the one calling people names here. Remember that. Have a good one. I hope that, one day, we can work together like we did before.Gator (talk) 22:29, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Blsoldclass2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Blsoldclass2.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me or ask for help at Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. Thank you. -- Carnildo 09:27, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome

You are more than welcome (not implying that I alone have the power to welcome anyone, I'm just trying to be nice) to make edits and improve upon those problems at any time. Hope to see you.Gator (talk) 21:38, 17 February 2006 (UTC)