User talk:StudierMalMarburg/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive 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.
Archive 1
| Archive 2 →

Welcome.

This is a Wikipedia user talk page, not an encyclopedic article. If you want to leave a comment, please do so. However, do not edit or change existing comments. This goes for busybody user bots too.

StudierMalMarburg is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Welcome!

Hello, StudierMalMarburg, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  SallesNeto BR 15:43, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Contents

Minor edits

Remember to mark your edits as minor when, but only when, they genuinely are (see Wikipedia:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one, or vice versa, is condsidered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that an edit of a page that is spelling corrections, formatting, and minor rearranging of text should be flagged as a 'minor edit'. -Will Beback 05:09, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Edit Summary Request

I have noted that you edit without an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. An edit summary is even more important if you delete any text; otherwise, people may think you're being sneaky or even vandalizing. Also, mentioning one change but not another one can be misleading to someone who finds the other one more important; add "and misc." to cover the other change(s). Thanks! -- Kukini 16:01, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Pap Singleton

Dear StudierMalMarburg! - I hope this message will reach you. I have previously tried to uplaod an image on the article on Benjamin "Pap" Singleton - which was deleted by you because of possible copyrigt infringements. However, you confessed to liking the image - so I believe in your good will and pure intentions.

The image is seen here: Image:Singleton - Benjamin Pap.jpg

Following your correction I have acquired a written permission from Kansas State Historical Society. It was signed on 4/9/07 by Mrs Nancy Sherbert, Curator of Photographs and Special Collections Acquisitions of KSHS. It was even free of charge for the specific use on Wikipedia.com. I would be glad to send it to you in copy if only I knew where you are. Would you kindly contact me via ablichfeldt@hotmail.com?

The uploading procedure is far too complicated for me. Please help me. The image should be placed there now. Yours Ablichfeldt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ablichfeldt (talk • contribs) 19:00, 9 May 2007

Thanks. If you've got permission, then let the administrative staff of Wikipedia know. They'll help you with the rest. StudierMalMarburg 15:59, 19 May 2007 (UTC)


The naming conventions are wrong? How are they wrong? I don't understand what you're saying. All I know is this page reads as follows:

[Use] the name that is unambiguous with the name of other articles...
Don't add qualifiers (such as "King", "Saint", "Dr.", "(person)", "(ship)"), except when this is the simplest and most NPOV way to deal with disambiguation;
For people, this quite often leads to an article name in the following format:
<First name> <Last name> (examples: Billy Joel, Margaret Thatcher)

And this page says nothing about nicknames. Ergo, the title should not include "Pap." How does this move "muddies the title for people who may have wanted precise information?" I fixed any redirects, so anyone searching for any iteration of the name will find the same information. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 15:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

FYI

This guy here says

"That came to pass, and then as Wikipedia correctly states, "After World War II, the railroad began pulling back on its operations in Salida." But then Wikipedia tells us that "The railroad pulled up its tracks in the 1970s." The narrow-gauge line over Poncha Pass was abandoned in 1951, and over Marshall Pass in 1955. The Monarch Quarry spur line went standard-gauge in 1956 and lasted until 1984. No tracks hereabouts were pulled up in the 1970s. The old main line along the Arkansas River has been "out of service" for nearly a decade, since the Union Pacific acquired the Rio Grande system in a 1996 merger, but the tracks were still there Friday morning when I walked the dog nearby."

refering to something you wrote. WAS 4.250 10:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Benjamin Singleton

Your recent edit to Benjamin Singleton (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 12:38, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Unreferenced Articles

Hi, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. However, please realize that not every article needs a reference. Some badly too. However, stubs like Sometimes the Magic Works are probably OK without them. Please don't misunderstand; I'm not criticizing that you put the tags in, just please use discretion in where they go. I hope this doesn't sound too caustic. -Patstuart 01:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your concern. I understand where you're coming from. However, coming from my experience I've found that an unreferenced article is usually plagiarized or fabricated. If someone can take the time to post information, then they can take the time to list their source material. StudierMalMarburg 13:23, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Time Travelers (1964)

StudierMalMarburg, I have a couple of suggestions: 1. Rather than complain how bad something is why not contribute to make it better? 2. You were correct in that the article "Time Travelers (1964)" was not categorized and thus needed one. I categorized it properly. The article is basically a stub that needs further additions. As for the source it was written by knowlege of watching the movie. 3. If your interested in this article why not research it and contribute?? 4. Also, rather then getting into deletion wars with folks why not use the discussion pages as I am doing here to help solve any issues? Thanks for Listening. FrankWilliams 19:07, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Let me address your concerns.
First, I'm not complaining. I'm simply pointing out a deficiency that needs to be corrected. Articles lacking citations are rightly considered either plagiarized or fabricated. It is an essential rule of academics. If I were knowledgeable in the subject, I would contribute and make the citations myself. However, since I have never researched the topic, I leave that to others.
Second, a stub alone is not proper categorization. It simply indcates that the article needs expansion. Clearly you don't know much about categories and I would suggest reading up on them in the Community Portal.
Third, this is the same as your first point, and my answer is the same. This is something that others have more knowledge on than I do. Plus, if you haven't researched it enough yourself in that you are incapable of providing citations, then why worry when others point out that it needs more expert attention?
This isn't a deletion war. I haven't deleted anything in the article. I've simply added a couple of tags, which should be self-explanitory. If you want to explain your reasons for deleting them, then go ahead and post that in the discussion page, not here in my area.
Finally, you shouldn't take things like this so personally. Wikipedia is a public encyclopedia, and any article posted becomes part of the public domain. If you want to claim personal ownership of the "Time Travelers (1964)" article, then you posted it in the wrong place. StudierMalMarburg 16:03, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Ok fair enough but your User Page really makes it look like your are complaining about Wikipedia. Yes, you are right you didn't delete anything; sorry. Also, wasn't really taking it personally just trying to contribute like everyone else. I see that you added a category and noted that "it was easy"; just wish you'd done that the first time. Anyway happy wikiing.FrankWilliams 22:56, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Benjamin Pap Singleton

Hi, StudierMalMarburg. I'm just alerting you that there is a discussion at Talk:Benjamin Pap Singleton accompanying a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves in which people are talking about moving the article back to Benjamin Singleton. Since you're the one who moved the page to the current location, I thought you might be interested in contributing to the discussion, which is currently leaning towards undoing your move. -GTBacchus(talk) 04:50, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Moves

You wrote:

I really don't mean to follow you around and this is all I'll say on the subject. However, after our discussion on Singleton, and after I called your attention to a similar title in the King Oliver article, I noticed that you went in there and did the same thing. You unilaterally altered someone else's article title without first initiating a discussion. I understand the naming conventions, but you shouldn't make unilateral decisions on articles that people have spent a lot of time on; that is, unless you want to get people angry with you. If you want to make a significant change like altering a title, then start a discussion on the topic and build a consensus. If you can do it, then the title changes. If you can't then you should leave the title alone. I've said my peace and now I'll leave it be. StudierMalMarburg 22:35, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Do you notice the irony of this suggestion...? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 22:54, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks While I still disagree with your assessment on article naming conventions, your statments on the talk page were kind-hearted and concilliatory. Thanks for the good faith in spite of our disagreements. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 03:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

How about the positive?

Most of the positive things you've heard about Wikipedia are true, too, no? Catbar (Brian Rock) 01:03, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

No, they're not. The positive rumors that this is a useful, informative site are offset by the ability of self-proclaimed experts with little more than an amateur's enthusiasm to shout down and override legitimate, educated scholars. I will admit that it's an enjoyable web site, but its academic usefulness is almost nil. StudierMalMarburg 15:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Ok. Puzzling though, you're trying to improve Wikipedia. Usually, people who express these types of opinions don't. I'm a bit on the fence as to what Wikipedia might become, either positive or negative, but it is enjoyable. Thanks. Catbar (Brian Rock) 03:23, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

your recent edits

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. JoeSmack Talk 17:53, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a mere collection of weblinks - see WP:NOT for more about this. It isn't a place to link to other wiki's - links must be encyclopedic and relevant. See WP:EL and WP:SPAM for more too. Hope this helps! JoeSmack Talk 18:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
If the content is encyclopedic and all that, move the info over here - end result is the link should be removed. If not, it shouldn't be linked in the first place - link is removed. JoeSmack Talk 18:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Perhaps you enjoy articles where there's no reference to further, outside information, but I don't. StudierMalMarburg 15:04, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Fictional Captains

First, cut the hype. Of the 170+ that were tagged, only 20-25 lacked any relationship to the guidelines added. Not "2/3" (that would have been 120) Second, I did look at the cat when you first tagged Capt Triumph. The cats it's attached to imply strongly that it relates to 1) the military rank and 2) naval occupations. Third, if you feel that the ghost's role in the military qualify, not a problem. That becomes a difference of interpretation. Last, without the limiters of why the title is being applied, the category winds up with some nonsensical linkages between characters: ie: Captain Carrot (rabbit super-hero whose day job is a writer) equating to Samantha Carter equating to Han Solo. Categories do need a degree of applied common sense otherwise they can devolve into useless trivia. — J Greb 23:01, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

None of this is any skin off my nose. StudierMalMarburg 19:20, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Colors

Hi StudierMalMarburg but the colors in the template are only for active players, like Terrell Davis shouldn't have the Broncos colors instead it should be default. Thanx --Phbasketball6 20:09, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I saw that you took the color out of John Elways infobox, please don't do this anymore. At first I only wanted active players to have the color, but I was fighting a battle that couldn't be won. Thanks--Phbasketball6 00:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Here's the talk page about, you can send a comment
  • Did you or did you not want this done? StudierMalMarburg 10:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

references

Hey. I noticed your relative frequency in tagging articles unreferenced. While certainly useful, a lot of the ones you tag are one-sentence stubs, and I question the point of tagging then when you could probably find a reference for said articles quite easily. Just a thought, though you don't have to agree.--Wizardman 01:48, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank You and Agreement

You are correct that more than normal perseverance is necessary for editing Wikipedia. Still, it is a valuable (if not citeable) resource for many things - for example, your own contributions to Timeline of the African-American Civil Rights Movement. Information can be found in Wikipedia that simply can't be found otherwise with any rational amount of effort - it may need checking, but at least you have some idea of what to look for. I always advocate checking Wikipedia first. I liken Wikipedia to Robert Young Pelton's The World's Most Dangerous Places (see http://www.comebackalive.com/df/dplaces.htm), or The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy - both indispensible, if not completely reliable. -I like to say that for the truly cool there are blogs - for the rest of us, there's Wikipedia. Simesa 04:12, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Ethnic-group lists deletion discussions

Hi, I noticed you participated in the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of African Americans (3rd nomination) deletion discussion. If you haven't participated in the very similar Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Chinese Americans discussion, which involves essentially the same issues, please do. There's also the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Caucasian Americans (second nomination). I'll asking everyone who participated in one to participate in the others. I apologize for bothering you if you already have participated in more than one. Best wishes, Noroton 04:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Interstate 70

Regarding your project tag insertion, we at USRD have determined that there is only a need for one project tag on that article (the WP:IH tag in this case). Thus, I have removed your addition of the WikiProject Kansas tag.  V60 VTalk · VDemolitions 18:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I honestly do not see the harm in having two project tags inserted on a talk page, nor do I see the harm of two groups working together to make the best possible article. However, if it is your desire to be territorial about it, then so be it. StudierMalMarburg 18:00, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for telling me about the WikiProject Kansas! I have added myself to the list. L337p4wn 04:06, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Template substitution

It is not an unusual thing for templates to be substituted. Changing the initial mention from {{welcome}} to {{subst:welcome}} means that the template is used once, and the output text is substituted once into the page. The servers never need to do that work again.

For some templates, where the text will never change, this is done automatically by bots. For other templates, where the use of the template needs to be tracked (e.g. using "What links here") or if the text substituted by the template might need to change (maybe help links or something), the bots leave that alone. {{welcome}} is something that should be substituted once.

I'm confused - what was your concern? (I'm still learning) Shenme 20:30, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Uh, there's nothing wrong with template substitution. It's a commonly accepted and approved practice that reduces server load and prevents changes in template syntax from significantly influencing their content. The accusation of vandalism is, to say the least, a bit ludicrous. That said, if you insist on no substitution, simply add to you talk page. Be warned that templates may cease to function as they are supposed to. alphachimp 00:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

On regular article pages, it's fine. On a user's own talk page, it's vandalism. I simply request that you and your vandalbot leave my page alone. StudierMalMarburg 12:59, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Uh, it's not a vandalbot, but whatever. I see that you've properly replaced the template. Please read WP:SUBST before making any other ridiculous accusations of vandalism. Thanks. alphachimp 13:22, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Uh, yourself. Any automated bot that fundamentally alters the text of anyone else's message is a vandal. Pure and simple. Now please go away and harrass someone else. StudierMalMarburg 16:12, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Marburg

Nur so aus Neugier, woher kommt eigentlich dein username? Da studiert? —AldeBaer 15:56, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Mein username kommt von einer Zeit ich habe ausgegeben als ein Student an Philipps-Universität in Marburg. Vergeben Sie auch, bitte mein Deutsch, als es sehr arm ist. StudierMalMarburg 17:31, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I see. No prob re language, wouldn't have asked in German if not for the name. —AldeBaer 20:12, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Redirects

In case you haven't taken the time to do so yet, please read WP:CAT-RD. For example, please do not add a trivial redirect, as you did to Elastic Lad last month. See me if you have any questions, comments or concerns. Lord Sesshomaru

OverlordQBot

Thanks for the heads up with problems with OverlordQBot, seems it was replacing pages when it didn't need to. I'd welcome you to try your Sandbox edits again and see if the problem is fixed. I've changed some delays around to hopefully fix the problem. Q T C 22:36, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Michael Tornambe

An article that you have been involved in editing, Michael Tornambe, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Tornambe (2nd nomination). Thank you. --B. Wolterding 11:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Asking for help on WiKUpedia project

Hi StudierMalMarburg,

My name is Jarrod and I'm currently working on a project called WiKUpedia, with the goal of providing the one-stop shop for all things KU. We've had a tremendous response from the community since we went live on Sunday but we need help organizing and improving the wiki. We decided to reach out to experienced Wikipedia editors working on the WikiProject: Kansas. You can read a little more about our project in a news story in the Lawrence Journal World

Please feel free to take a look around our project and if this sounds like something that interests you, please respond on my talk page or by email. Thank you so much in advance. Jarrodm (talk) 04:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Exodusters

Hi,

I got interested in the Exodusters because of a friend whose grandmother moved from Memphis to Kansas in the 1920's. She clearly wasn't part of the exoduster movement, but I am curious whether you know of any exodus to Kansas from Memphis occurring in the 20th century? My friend says there were quite a few that went.

Also, I notice that there is another Wikipedia article on the exodus, called the Exodus of 1879, that seems to have somewhat more material. It seems to me that the articles should be merged; I copied the references from your version to the other, which seems pretty harmless, but I didn't like to change the body of either article since I know nothing about the subject. Merger seems to be a good idea, but I'd like to know what you think.

Perhaps you're not involved with wikipedia any more, but just thought I'd ask. My wiki page is Ngriffeth

Thanks, Nancy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ngriffeth (talk • contribs) 14:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)