User talk:Smerus/New Archive 1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Image:Yblmiklos.jpg
Hi. I was processing this image, which was nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/2007 December 8. Based on your statement at Image:Yblmiklos.jpg, I have tagged it with {{subst:nsd}}. You indicated that you are willing to have it used on Wikipedia. If you are still willing to, could you provide appropriate licensing terms on the image page? If you would like to license it under the GFDL, you can use {{GFDL-user|Smerus}}. If you would like to release it into the public domain, you can use {{PD-user|Smerus}}. Optionally, if you prefer for it to show up as being uploaded by you or if you would like to re-upload a higher resolution version, you can upload it to that same filename, enter whatever license you would like, and let me know and I'll delete the old version so it will show as being uploaded by you. Thanks. --B (talk) 23:43, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
nice edit
your work on The Wandering Jew article is greatly appreciated. It's nice and concise now - very well organzied. Thanks so much!LiPollis (talk) 14:11, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
List of autobiographies
Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article List of autobiographies, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (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 discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{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. BJBot (talk) 17:29, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
István Bató
Hi,
I understand that the article right now doesn't meet the notability criteria, but I'll try to add more info and sources in the future. It is allowed to move it to a subpage of my userpage until I find the sources? If it's not good enough for WP right now, I'll blank the subpage, but I'd like to keep the page history.
regards, – Alensha talk 17:23, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Braham
Dear Smerus, Happy New Year... I don't know if such things interest you, but (for your interest) a well-known online secondhand book agency includes a notice of an autograph note by JB for sale in Lincs., traceable by searching keywords "Braham autograph". Best wishes, Eebahgum (talk) 16:33, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
London Meetup - January 12, 2008
Hi! There's going to be a London Wikipedia Meetup coming Saturday January 12, 2008. If you are interested in coming along take part in the discussion over at Wikipedia:Meetup/London7. The discussion is going on until tomorrow evening and the official location and time will be published at the same page late Thursday or early Friday. Hope to see you Saturday, Poeloq (talk) 03:12, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Charles-Valentin Alkan
Hi, I want to be sure we are working on the same page here, at Charles-Valentin Alkan. Am I doing constructive things to an article you obviously have a much longer history with? If not, I will leave it alone, no problem. I don't have a problem with you correcting slips or outright errors, but at the same time it's a little disheartening to have that done with slightly disparaging edit summaries.
One of the biggest problems we all have with this subject is the validity of references. None of the references I use correct the story about the Talmud, for example, but I wouldn't discredit the rest of their information. Lewenthal, for example, has some authority of the performance of Alkan's music, for example. So when his book states that they were connected to Morhange, for example, I take it as true, because what I assume I am reading is a factual history, which obviously isn't the case, in many ways. But I can't email his official biographer with every statement and ask whether it is true or not. This is a difficult article to work on, but it would be even more difficult for me to leave it as it is. ALTON .ıl 18:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, that all makes perfect sense. With great pleasure I hope to continue working with you on the article. ALTON .ıl 09:27, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Kaplanmusicians.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Kaplanmusicians.jpg. 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) 23:02, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
A new Oxbridge user box
Smerus...I am currently in the process of writing a user box for all of the colleges that are part of Oxbridge. This template is meant to replace your current college template. Please take a look at the work in progress and comment on it. My main concerns are college abbreviations and color choice. I am using scarf colors for the colleges. Thank you. - LA @ 17:37, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't realize that the colleges were more important than the parent university. I have never been to any of these places, I just thought it would be neat to have a single user box for all of these related schools instead of dozens scattered all over the place. Also, can I please be forgiven those typos? If you have any suggestions, please put them here? - LA @ 20:07, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Kudos for diplomacy
I'm impressed with the diplomatic way you worded this user talk page message. I want to learn to talk like that! --Coppertwig (talk) 13:24, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Thanks for setting a good example that I can try to learn from! --Coppertwig (talk) 13:33, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Happy New Year!
13:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Chaim Elozor Wax
Don't Delete - Both of the reference books are available in any store, I have one of them also in pdf, give your e-mail address I should be able sending it to you. Next time please be carefull before attacking. It is a very important article, and is still not complete. Shoteh (talk) 21:16, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Barnstar of Diplomatic Exemplitude
 |
The Barnstar of Diplomatic Exemplitude | |
| I, Coppertwig, award you, Smerus, this Barnstar of Diplomatic Exemplitude for this edit, which I held in mind as an ideal to strive for while writing this edit, which earned me this barnstar. |
Regards, --Coppertwig (talk) 20:22, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- I am not sure what that is, but I agree that Wikipedia needs more diplomatic exemplitude! Diplomatic remarks do deserve to be recognized, and are especially honored when the award coins a new word. (We certainly give enough recognition to personal attacks). I hope Coppertwig will forgive me if I borrow that barnstar for some awards that I hope to give to other editors. EdJohnston (talk) 20:35, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'd be delighted. May the number of editors deserving such an award be myriadinous! This barnstar is based on the Barnstar of Peace. However, I don't think I'm the one who coined the word "exemplitude". It has 109 Google hits. --Coppertwig (talk) 13:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
AfD Nomination of Oxbridge
Hi, I have nominated Oxbridge for deletion since it reads entirely as WP:OR. You can find the discussion here. ColdmachineTalk 22:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Le pardon de Ploërmel
Just a note to say I've asked about using this title (rather than Dinorah) on the talk page. Best. --Kleinzach (talk) 01:26, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Richard Wagner
Hi Smerus, about your animalistic edit. I think its pathetic to make Wagner responsible for the Nazis respetcively Hitler especially taking claim of Wagner. However the Animal protection activities had an antisemitic stance, which went hand in hand with Wagners well known specific views on the topic. --Polentario (talk) 14:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Please don't cut-and-paste
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently copied the contents of a page and pasted it into another with a different name. This is what we call a "cut and paste move", and it is very undesirable because it splits the article's history, which is needed for attribution and is helpful in many other ways. The mechanism we use for renaming an article is to move it to a new name which both preserves the page's history and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. In most cases, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. If there is an article that you cannot move yourself by this process, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves to request the move by another. Also, if there are any other articles that you copied and pasted, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you.
I mean Portmanteau and Portmanteau word. The message above is standardized and doesn't contain my opinion. - TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:34, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Portmanteau word vs. portmanteu
In the article, portmanteau word, you changed "portmanteau" to "portmanteau word" in one place, but left it alone in another. However, is it necessary to repeat the word "word" over and over? The first sentence of the article says "portmanteau" is sometimes used. Why not make use of that fact? In any case, you should either revert your change as unnecessary, or make the change consistently throughout the article (I think only one more instance would need changing). Thanks.—GraemeMcRaetalk 20:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
