User talk:Squigish

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello Squigish, 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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  EdwinHJ | Talk 06:08, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] The Hookah

I didn't mean it to be spam. I think the movement is still small enough that it hasn't become synonymous with Social Smoke. With more media coverage, it might be popular enough that a 100% American company that makes these Oriental smoking tools would be appropriate to put into the hookah article. They're based out of Dallas Texas and their manufacturing is in Austin, Texas.

[edit] Wesleyan, Theater, Jorge Luis Borges

I realize that you're in Seattle, but I thought that you might be interested to know that this April, Wesleyan is producing a senior thesis play based on the stories of Jorge Luis Borges, called "Labyrinths." Squigish 23:02, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Kind of amusing. Back when I was there they didn't know from Borges. Latin American literature got no respect in the early 1970s. I have my very ethnically diverse high school and its very good Spanish department to thank for my interest in Borges. During college, I used to buy Borges books (mostly in the original) in Boston & New York; to the best of my recollection, none were for sale at Atticus.
I never took any Spanish classes at Wesleyan, so it's possible that he was being taught in that department, but that department was, itself, quite condescended to. I remember being put down by would-be intellectuals among my classmates because I hadn't learned an "academically useful" language in high school. -- Jmabel | Talk 02:14, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flagging page for bias

The Noor Jehan page seems to have become someone's attempt at writing flowery biography. However, I'm not familiar enough yet with Wikipedia's norms to just do a big edit on it myself. What is the best way to handle this situation? --SnappingTurtle

[edit] Help with formatting problems

I just added a picture to the page about Emily's Reasons Why Not. There was already an infobox in that page, and with the two of them together they don't format quite right. Can you direct me to a resource for fixing the problem? --SnappingTurtle

Looks like you've taken care of it. --Squigish 19:50, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bobby

I am still getting to grips with Vandalproof. This might be the reason some vandal got trough the cracks, or your reverted something I tried to revert but ended up reverting yours. Sorry for that. Havok (T/C/c) 16:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

This one apparently does. Removed the warning and I'll try and be more careful next time. Havok (T/C/c) 16:19, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Safaricom

Just a friendly reminder to use an edit summary when proposing deletion for an article. Edit summary usage is always good, but it is especially important that edit summaries are used when proposing deletion. The reason for this is that articles proposed for deletion that later have the {{prod}} tag removed should not be proposed for deletion again, but rather sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. The only easy way to check if an article was previously proposed for deletion is to look at the edit history and the edit summaries people have left before. Thanks! Also, please give a reason when you add the prod tag to an article. Thanks again! Mangojuicetalk 13:56, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad you asked. Check out Wikipedia:Introduction to Deletion Process, that should set you straight. The short answer is, prod and afd are not the same. If something is obviously, no question, non-notable, and non-notable in a category the community agrees on (like biographies of people, or articles on bands or companies), or if the article is blatantly inappropriate, prod is a good choice. But prod specifically avoids debate, on the basis of the article's deletion being assumed to be non-controversial. A lot of articles like that do get created; check out 8 Ugly for an example of what I consider an ideal type of article to prod. AfD on the other hand, can be found at WP:AFD, and posts deletion nominations publically for about a week, while the community tries to form consensus about their deletion. Mangojuicetalk 04:51, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

hi, I worked on the SNAP-25 page [and some other newly created pages on syntaxin, synaptotagmin, SNARE (protein)], you may check it now. Danko Georgiev MD 09:14, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Thanks for defending my user page! Jacek Kendysz 21:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ST-VOY Drone.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:ST-VOY Drone.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) 19:43, 26 November 2007 (UTC)