User talk:TallulahBelle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome, TallulahBelle!

I noticed your work on Stairway to Heaven, and thought I'd welcome you to Wikipedia. My name is Dan, a.k.a. Audacity. Thank you for your contributions, and I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Some other hints and tips:

If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Or come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have.

Thanks again for contributing to Wikipedia. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian.

Λυδαcιτγ 20:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

It's a small point, but date ranges should be separated by en dashes, not em dashes. —Chowbok 02:03, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

What a wonderful username! Chris 15:02, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Aishwarya Rai.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Aishwarya Rai.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} 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 you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yamla 01:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Dead-eye syndrome

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Dead-eye syndrome, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria.

[edit] Beer pong

Your recent contribution(s) to the Wikipedia article Beer pong are very much appreciated. However, you did not provide references or sources for your information. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a drive to improve the quality of Wikipedia by encouraging editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. If sources are left unreferenced, it may count as original research, which is not allowed. Can you provide in the article specific references to any books, articles, websites or other reliable sources that will allow people to verify the content in the article? You can use a citation method listed at How to cite sources. Thanks! --AW 17:24, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Historiography

Please see the talk page, per the previous edit comment. You get 3 reverts in a 24hr period, on the 4th it can be reported to a admin and possibly lead to being blocked. -- Stbalbach 19:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Vandalism"

Please be careful in referring to edits as "vandalism". The term has a specific definition on Wikipedia, set out at WP:VANDAL. You seem to be having a content dispute with User:Stbalbach. Vandalism is a bad-faith attempt to damage Wikipedia; instead, it appears you both intend to improve the article in question but have very different ideas on how to do so. Content disputes may get quite heated, but his edits are not vandalism; please don't refer to them as such. You may also wish to look at WP:3RR - reverting more than 3 times in a 24-hour period is expressly forbidden; even 3 times is probably too much, and it's best to try to talk these issues through on the article talk page instead of getting involved in an edit war. MastCell Talk 23:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Violation of WP:3RR on Historiography

You have violated the 3 revert rule on the article Historiography by performing 4 reverts in one day[1][2][3][4]. I am blocking you for 12 hours, please do not edit in this manner in the future. For more information see WP:3RR and WP:CONSENSUS. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 23:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Dead-eye syndrome

I've nominated Dead-eye syndrome, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Dead-eye syndrome satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dead-eye syndrome and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Dead-eye syndrome during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. →AzaToth 01:31, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Fictional Dartmouth College alumni

An editor has nominated Fictional Dartmouth College alumni, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fictional Dartmouth College alumni and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 20:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comments from Snowboarding

Thanks for your efforts to restore the history section -- it certainly should remain in the article! I've moved this comment here from Talk:Snowboarding as it is not particularly helpful to the article, and I thought I'd reply personally. Also, please add new talk page sections to the bottom of the talk page.. see more details at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines.

[edit] Why the vandalism?

The history of the sport was removed literally months ago, and no one has bothered to replace it. Also, different snowboarding aspects that seem to be essential (goofy style, etc.) are nowhere to be found. On the other hand, minor or peripheral aspects of the sport, such as snowboarding movies, take up a disproportionate share of the article.

Why the vandalism? Because you can't call it anything other than vandalism when the history of a sport is altogether excised, and no one says a thing. I don't know much about snowboarding, but it seems incredible that in the Wikipedia community, knowledgeable people would allow this article to become so measely. --TallulahBelle 17:39, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks much for catching this -- however -- your solution to the problem was to perform a wholesale revert back many revisions ( diff ). This may have restored the history section, but also reintroduced many inappropriate external links and removed two foreign language links. In effect, you solved 1 problem while recreating 2 others. I reworked the article to include the history section as well as the edits you removed, which is hopefully the best of both worlds.
As far as your talk page comment, you may refer to the handy template {{sofixit}}. Comments containing nothing but complaints, particularly when agressive, are generally best left unsaid. Postitive and constructive criticism is welcomed. Stick around for a while and I'm sure you'll find it is impossible to keep up with even a tiny fraction of changes in the project. We could of course use any help you might offer toward maintaining and improving the encyclopedia! Stick around, keep the comments positive, assume good faith, and dive in to help ;).. ∴ here…♠ 21:48, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Hillaryland

The claim you made that the Hillaryland stub was unverified and unsourced is blatantly inaccurate. I sourced the original stub with a link to the Washington Post, the preeminent political news organization in the US. If that is unsourced, then tell me what is. Your labelling struck me as arbitrary and spurious. --TallulahBelle 17:13, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Firstly, please remember to assume good faith on the part of other editors - your enquiry is unnecessarily hostile in tone. I don't think that you mean this but words on a page can be interpreted in more than one way. Hmmm, I see the problem. You have supplied an external link but not placed it within the framework for inline references, so it doesn't display in the prescribed manner. Have you seen Wikipedia:Footnotes at all? This demonstrates the correct manner for applying <reference> tags. Wikipedia:Citing sources is also useful. I will either make the necessary changes to the article when I return at 2100 UTC or look and see what you have done in the interim. Regards, (aeropagitica) 17:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use violation

Don't revert fair use violations as blatant vandalism. If you think it isn't a violation of fair use, please visit WP:AN/I and ask for administrator for their opinion. Removing it was not blatant vandalism, and treating it like blatant vandalism in your edit summary is deceptive and a blockable offense to say the least. — Moe ε 08:43, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Cliffordirving72.jpg

Hello, please note that non-free images are not eligible as featured picture candidates (see WP:WIAFP). Thanks, -- Chris B • talk 20:34, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that you replaced the image of Clifford Irving on the featured pictures candidates page. I removed it from featured pictures candidates again. Please read the criteria for featured pictures, specifically points 2. Is of high resolution and 4. Has a free license. The image you've nominated is only 506 pixels in its longest dimension; the criteria specify that it must be at least 1000 pixels in its longest dimension. As for the license, it's a violation of fair use to link to a fair use image on a page other than the article page, and this is why your nomination has been closed instead of just left open to be opposed. In addition, in the future, if you nominate a different image to be a featured picture, please put the new nomination up on the top of the page instead of at the bottom. If you'd like feedback on whether to nominate a future image as a featured picture, and assistance in nominating if other editors agree that the image should be a featured picture, please nominate the image at picture peer review.
Also, it's important to avoid edit warring; if you disagree with the close of your featured picture nomination, it is best to discuss the issue with other editors instead of reverting. If you do more than three reverts in a 24 hour period, you will be blocked for 24 hours violating the three revert rule. Thanks for listening. Enuja (talk) 23:54, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Speedy deletion of Douglas Fairbairn

A tag has been placed on Douglas Fairbairn requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Pumpmeup 00:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Heavens gate.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Heavens gate.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) 06:55, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Aquatic ape hypothesis

Please note the discussion here. WLU (talk) 17:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Gnosis Experience?

Hi. This is totally off Wiki topic, but I was perusing the debate in the Dartmouth Review talk page and I saw your Gnosis reference. I was part of the founding group and was Editor-in-Chief in 1989 - 1990. What was your experience with it etc. etc. and "where is it now" (or at least more recently than 1990 when I graduated)? You can e-mail me through Wikipedia if you want to take this offline. Mattnad (talk) 18:37, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jaws

Why are you adding a gigantic space? Alientraveller (talk) 14:03, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, make sure it's sourced. The article is FA afterall. Alientraveller (talk) 14:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:MemoriesOfTheFordAdministration.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:MemoriesOfTheFordAdministration.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rettetast (talk) 13:59, 16 April 2008 (UTC)