User talk:Themightyquill

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive
Archives

Contents

[edit] Kechewaishke

Hi, will you do a copyedit on Kechewaishke, as you have a good sense in details and flow? User:Leo1410 have put in a great amount of effort into this article, and feels after the copyedit, it could be nominated for GA. Thanks. CJLippert (talk) 23:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Baker Lake case

I just read your message from February 6, 2008. I'm semi-retired from wikipedia for the time being, however, I do hope to come back sometime and do some more case summaries. I'll keep that one that you mention in mind. --PullUpYourSocks (talk) 22:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Some info here about the case. --Mathew5000 (talk) 17:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bill Reid

Regarding: [1]. Why do you assume that it has to be public domain? Because it isn't a public domain image doesn't mean that has to be removed. It was used under a claim of fair use and was applicable per WP:NFCC. I see you added another image to the article from the WikiMedia Commons as a replacement, but don't remove images simply because it isn't free. — Save_Us † 03:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

And now there appears to be a different problem. Image:Raven-and-the-first-men.jpg, the image you added as the replacement is facing deletion as it is a potential copyright violation because it is non-free. In other words, you're "free" image is marked is now marked as non-free and going to be deleted. I readded the old image to the article, the one you removed, because that image was being used correctly already. — Save_Us † 03:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah ok, I didn't see the comments on the deletion page itself. Freedom of panorama appears to apply here. I have readded the public domain image and removed and tagged Image:Raven-bill reid.jpg for deletion since it is used under a claim of fair use. — Save_Us † 04:26, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Using Template:Cfd-notify

Hey there, Glad to see you made use of Template:Cfd-notify for the "terrorist org" CFD. There was a slight problem (which I've already taken care of) due to not "substituting" the template -- which causes the newly created section to link to Template:Cfd-notify! (yikes) Anyhow, I've clarified the instructions for using the template, so hopefully future users won't run into that problem -- you weren't the first. :) Regards, Cgingold (talk) 03:49, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Gradual civilization act - pdf to text

I can convert from PDF to text. Just tried it on An Act for the gradual enfranchisement of Indians the better management of Indian affairs and to extend the provisions of the Act 1869 and it works. I will submit that one too I think. Never submitted anything to wikisource before though. If you want to have me convert to text and do the basic wikisource upload I will do so. send to (turniponion at canoemail dot com). Thanks Fremte (talk) 17:04, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Article 198.237.103.101

Just wondering what's going on at 198.237.103.101 (its in the mainspace). Perhaps it should have been in Userspace? -ReuvenkT C 17:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds great. Thanks for all of your contributions, and sorry if that came off as rude. Re-reading my message now, it doesn't sound too nice. -ReuvenkT C 17:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lehi (group)

Yes, the edit protection can be removed from Lehi (group). Thank you. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 22:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Oka Crisis

My thoughts exactly re: Good Article. I don't think there's too much more work to be done to make it front-page worthy. Geoff NoNick (talk) 00:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:HU

Thanks for your help with the templates. The other two projects will possibly be merged into this one. Squash Racket (talk) 05:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 2006 merger discussion at Talk:History of Czechoslovakia (1918–1938)

If you get a chance, could you please swing by the above talk page? I'm really unclear why the merger proposal you largely supported has turned out the way it has. Thanks :) CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 00:53, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Happy First Day of Spring!

Happy First Day of Spring!

[edit] CS template

I've started a discussion with a few proposals here, and as one of the tireless editors on that template I'd appreciate it if you gave your thoughts and opinions. +Hexagon1 (t) 02:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Winter Salami

Why not describe the process that make s Winter salami unique? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Savolya (talk • contribs) 00:42, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Naming debate at Sněžka-Śnieżka

As a participant in the last, unsuccessful bid to change the name of this article, you should be advised of a new debate to move the article about Sněžka-Śnieżka. Your views on the current proposal would be especially welcome. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 05:34, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FAC

Left a suggestion on the FAC page, take a look. The Dominator (talk) 05:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Mighty Quill, I've created an article called Prague Spring reforms and we should focus on details there. In my opinion it's the best solution since up until now the Prague Spring article was an over view and a comprehensive detail-oriented article about the reforms and this was kind of conflicting. Now we can keep the Prague Spring article as an overview one. Do you think this is a good solution? The Dominator (talk) 16:02, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FYI new/old tribal/history resource

Pls see Talk:Coast Salish where I posted a link to a summary of old ethno write-ups used by genealogy.com; the link is to Washington but if you click around you'll find stuff on Canada-side peoples; interesting list of villages not seen anywhere else, also some breakdown of languages/groups I haven't seen before; esp. re Interior Salish and lower Columbia peoples.Skookum1 (talk) 14:59, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting btw in that it says that the Chilliwack-area Salish were originally Nooksack speakers rather than "Cowichan" (which the page uses for the Halkomelem-speaking group(s)).Skookum1 (talk) 15:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of Canadian Peacekeeping Missions

Just have to say, this is a fantastic idea for a list. Bravo. --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 00:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kriegel

I am amazed by your interest in František Kriegel - where does it come from? I proposed the article to the DYK[2] section on the main page so I would be obliged to you if you could check the grammar and maybe change the sound for native speakers... Thank you very much... Aloysius (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 04:51, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Talk:German occupation of Czechoslovakia

done --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 15:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


Quite the contrary I have been moving pages back which have been moved unilaterally without a consensus to move them. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 15:32, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

See my comment at Talk:German occupation of Czechoslovakia --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 15:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Besides why "Nazi Germany" and not "Third Reich" if one is going to name the state because according to a search of Google books (1510 on intitle:"Nazi Germany" and 1449 on intitle:"Third Reich") they are about as common as each other? --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 15:54, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] BC Provincial Archives

Has there been anything new on the BC archives claim to rule all public domain images? I read your posting at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject British Columbia/Archive/Archive Mar 2007. Clearly they have only copyright in their text, not in the PD images, and the letter from the archives admits this. I'm wondering if there has been anything new on the issue of whether it is okay as far as Wikipedia is concerned to simply crop off the meritless claims of PABC in the margins around obviously public domain material, such as postcards published in 1912, then post to Wikipedia? Mtsmallwood (talk) 22:14, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

(Hi Quill) Sssssh We're not letting on ;-). I think MQ will agree we've uncovered that {{pd-50}} applies, {{pd-100}} for stateside images. They can't own copyright, whteehr they claim to or not, on images where the photographer has been dead for more than 50 years; in Canad, that is. Grey areas abound. If you read their wording closely they only assert ownership of the negatives and prints, which is all they can charge for. Many images are also part of other estates, or haefv long sicne gone publ.ic in private collections of postca;rds and old pamphlets; all without copyright now because of their age. It's like the copyright on map data we've been disucing on Talk:Columbia River - User:Pfly has a whole campaign to overturn state copyright legislation (US gov has none). In my view, it's the bottom-line user-pays mentality of the government that's trying to squeeze money out of these images, when tye've already spent the money acquiring them (i.e. the taxpayers have already paid for it). in doing so, they're trying to bluff people into paying for use of images that aren't copyrightable. I think you'll find Steamboats of the Upper Fraser River in British Columbia and Steamboats of the Skeena River made by User:CindyBo and other articles were fleshed out with these; I know of links for countless other topics but just haven't got around to rendering/stripping them (see Talk:New Westminster, British Columbia). I do know that some of the images the Archives claims copyright on are also claimed by the family of the photographer Artie Phair, so that's hitting the courts at some point (this is on the q.t., as if this was private), and they're contesting ownership of the negs also by the way; bot hparties are likely to find out that neither or them own anything, and this would be precedent-setting and probably bringan end to the Archives' sale of images; except the prints, which is a service; I used VPL's and it was very disappointing; give me the negative, let me do the print for pity's sake, but no the gave me something "flat" and not evcen worth framing, myuch less uing in a reproduction like say for a book. Amateurs! (aid with hauteur).....Anyway sorry tblather on your page Quill, I'm all for using the pubic archive as a public heritage, and make it public....strip' em already..... ;-).23:57, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Actually I just found this on the New Westminster talkpage, about a {{PD-Canada}} tag which I didn't know had been invented....Skookum1 (talk) 00:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Restart

The idea of a restart is a whole new FAC, fresh look, previous FAC was stalled, previous comments wiped out. If previous comments are still completely applicable, they can be copied over, or you can start over if new commentary is warranted. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Homli, Relative of Yellow Bird

Hello there,

I was just curious about your change in the caption of the photo in the Yellow Bird page. would you mind letting me know where you got your information about the picture being Homli instead of Yellow Bird? I'm attempting to track down information on Homli for a patron and I'm having all sorts of difficulty nailing down which is the right name for the man in the photo. The print of this photo that we have in our archives states on the back that it is Yellow Bird, however in another picture of the same man, he is described as Chief Homli. Thanks for your help

OrcaG (talk) 17:11, 17 April 2008 (UTC)OrcaG

thanks so much for your help!

OrcaG (talk) 18:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)OrcaG

[edit] Sure

The IP edited tendentiously multiple articles (check the contribs) always inserting the same excessive unsourced population data from a time where no reliable censuses were done anywhere in the world because the level of technology did not allow it. Also had some other changes which I felt were tendentious. All these articles need major rewrites and reorganization (my old plan of going with chronology and dates). Btw did you check this link WP:HU ? Everyone can help who has an intrest in these types of articles. Hobartimus (talk) 15:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Btw the same IP just returned (rather the same person with a different IP) to make the same edits. Hobartimus (talk) 17:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hongcouver

According to the infamous Nat'l Geographic article using it as its title, the term was coined as a brag by new-Chinese immigrant kids; it's not surprising the Sun avoided talking about this given its ongoing distortion of BC politics and history. I tried finding the Nat'l Geog article in their online database but either it doesn't go back that far or they've had a post-facto change of title; maybe i can find it in the Dalhousie Library's periodicals collection to get the issue; it was c.1984 as I remember.Skookum1 (talk) 17:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:AFN-Logo.GIF

Thanks for uploading Image:AFN-Logo.GIF. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --19:56, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Josef Smrkovský

Hello again, I have had a little hard-work time lately but I am here again with a Prague Spring contribution - this time about Josef Smrkovsky. Could you help me again to make the article work in "real" English? I do not know if they considered Kriegel a Israel spy but certainly kept him away from the negotiations because of suspiction that he was not a "reliable"... Thank you for help... I want to try to suggest the article to DYK, too. (talk) 21:48, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I did a very bad job:( However, where you placed the [citation needed] for citation I gathered the ïnformation from the first mentioned source and I explicitly noted that in the reference... do you think I should put the citation on each of the points? Thanks again for your time and answer. (talk) 16:35, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] First Nations leaders

I'm pretty sure it's no worse than filing them directly in "Province politicians" (which is where almost all of them were sitting previously) is...but for what it's worth, we do have several other instances (people by county/city, etc.) where we've categorized people by geographic divisions that didn't actually exist in their time, but now encompass the entity that actually did exist. Frex, anybody who was from the Ontario towns of Galt, Preston or Hespeler goes into Category:People from Cambridge, Ontario even if they died before Cambridge actually came into being. If you have a better idea, though, then by all means, feel free. Bearcat (talk) 16:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Walter Dieter was also head of a Saskatchewan-specific body earlier in his career. Bearcat (talk) 16:19, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorrry to butt in, but I know OldManRivers prefers "indigenous" over FN as a term; and being "from" BC when some indigenous peoples don't recognize BC.... anyway maybe Category:Indigenous leaders in British Columbia might work? "First Nations leaders" also has a vague syntax, could mean leaders of First Nations governments, in the capital-FN sense, instead of the ethnic-adjective sense better filled by "indigenous" or "aboriginal". simplest of all is Category:Gitxsan leaders, Category:Sto:lo leaders", Category:Kwakwaka'wakw leaders, Category:Dakelh leaders etc; a catch-all parent cat is still needed, maybe Category:Leaders of indigenous peoples in British Columbia. Suggest you confer with User:OldManRivers and maybe also User:Billposer also re in/from etc..Skookum1 (talk) 16:38, 25 April 2008 (UTC).
Wickanninish, Maquinna, Hunter Jack, Gunanoot, Nicola were not in the politicians cat....though Nicola, Spintlum and Kowpelst, and others, will be in a "magistrates" cat....Skookum1 (talk) 16:42, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
The "Assembly of First Nations chiefs" category already covers his national role. If he hadn't also been chief of a First Nations organization in Saskatchewan he wouldn't even have been in "First Nations leaders" at all, because that category is meant for band chiefs at the local "analogous to a municipal mayor" level rather than leaders of national bodies. National leaders, such as AFN chiefs, are categorized elsewhere.
I'd be very much in favour of renaming the categories to "chiefs" instead of "leaders", since that's the term that's actually used by most FNs and would be a lot less ambiguous as to its intent. I'm not entirely sure why the original creator used "leaders", to be honest. Bearcat (talk) 16:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Not all of those on that list are "chiefs". I agree with what Skookum said about what I would say (lol). First Nations is the band governments, and he's right that some of these people don't recognize BC, and true, weren't around when BC was here. At the very least, [:Category:Leaders of indigenous peoples in British Columbia]] would be a good one. OldManRivers (talk) 16:55, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Whether they recognize BC or not is kind of irrelevant; if their land lies within what other people recognize as BC, then WP:NPOV pretty much dictates that we list and categorize them as being in BC. I recognize that it can be a complex and sometimes contentious issue, but Wikipedia isn't really the place for that kind of debate. Bearcat (talk) 17:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[unindent]Gunanoot wasn't a chief, and as recently explained to me by OldManRivers, August Jack Khahstahlano wasn't a hereditary chief anyway, although he was si:yam (as the temr is spelled in Halqemeylem, not sure about Swkxwu7mesh snichim; similarly Hunter Jack was called Chief in English, he was kukpi7 in St'at'imcets, doesn't mean the same thing either, and was a status rather than a title as also si:yam....point is "chiefs" then only sets the category for band-council chiefs; Maquinna and Wickaninnish in period accounts are "kings", no less....Category:First Nations kings (by your logic)??...."Leader" is teh standard set in the indigenous peoples' project categories e.g. Category:Native American leaders. And much as I didn't like having someone send it to me re my website's St'at'imc history page, there's a UN Declaration on Indigenous Rights calling for the observance of the indigenous point of view when writing about them; usually elders but around here OMR is the main FN input/viewpoint, we're actually trying to enlist more to help with many articles in eed of doing.. I won't be observing it for my own privately-written page, but I'd venture that the onus is on the Wiki community, as a public and very global organization, to respect it, or at least cope with the sensitivities involved. The Sta't'imc Nation for example, does not see itself as being in Canada. yes, that's POV, but so is the "normal" view that they're in Canada; in legal technicality it happens that they are not. Like most BC tribes west of the Rockies, in fact, because there have never been any treeaties to bring them or their lands into Crown sovereignty (this was just upheld in the Xeni Decision). The only way to cope with NPOV about all this is to make sure the indigenous point of view is accounted for; we've been trying to do this in discussions to do with indigenous-peoples templates out here, which necessarily have to be crossborder in order to observe native realities and sensitivities (see Template talk:Native peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast for starters...so yes, the common perception is that they're "in BC", and in a purely geographical sense they are; but not in a political or cultural sense, that's for certain. So do we entrench the common misperception, or do we set for an NPOV account? The NPOV account meaning an orientation respectful/sensitive to indigenous perceptions/cultures/realities, or go with the outside-world view, one where the majority overrides them and decides for them how they should be organized/presented/spoken of? To me, it's pretty clear that the only path to true NPOV here is to deal with the views of who's being talked about, not dictate to them what we think is best....Skookum1 (talk) 17:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Romany vs. Romani

Filtering out the term "Romania" didn't help too much because the term "români" (the plural form of the Romanian word for the Romanian people) can't be filtered out. It does'nt matter weather you write "â" or "a", because the google search engine searces in all the cases as an "a". Besides, the form "Romany" is more accurate, because the confusion with other terms (see: Romani) is partially avoided. --Olahus (talk) 16:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Canadian residential school system deaths

I saw your comment with the edit concerning deaths in the Canadian Residential School system. I agree that the source is sufficient. I have read the source you provided and I must say that I am astounded. It adds an entire new dimension to this tragedy. The earlier edit that I deleted referred directly to a Globe and Mail article that was poorly cited and I was not able to find it. Your source clears that up. Thanks for providing this new (to me at least) information. It is a valuable addition to the article and warrants further research. I have also come across some other sources [3], [4] and [5] and will be keeping an eye on this issue. --KenWalker | Talk 16:26, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Be very careful here; see [http://thetyee.ca/Views/2008/04/30/TruthAndAbuse/ this rticlea esp. read the forum comments at the bottom; be very careful of pov sources; we don't need an invasion of 'truth mongers' - they silenced debate at the tyee by yelling at everyone.Skookum1 (talk) 16:42, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Conestoga Lake

Thanks for the help on the article.

Does Wikipedia generally add the type of substrate, normal pH level and such about lakes? It was actually this that I was looking for(and unable to find anywhere) when I added the article, and I think if a stub tag was added to the end of the disambiguation page, then perhaps it could be improved? --Tehol (talk) 22:13, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


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

Thanks for uploading Image:BlackCandle.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 06:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hey, thak you so much for the mofongo pic on the PR Cuisine article!

Está muy buena... --Portorricensis (talk) 18:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Doncaster Secondary College.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Doncaster Secondary College.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] You say erb, I say herb, let's call the whole thing off.

This came up in discussion last night; turns out someone I know pronounces it 'erb' as well, which would seem well out of line for a Melburnian, even a somewhat pompous one (unresolved issue the first). This post references a dictionary which explains that, well, pretty much the British got it wrong, by pronouncing the leading 'h' of a word derived from French. Because North America had already been populated by British subjects by then, the original pronunciation remained unchanged. This of course does not explain why exception words such as herbicide -- which may have entered the mainstream awareness later -- did not have the silent 'h' rule applied (unresolved issue the second).

One thing's certain: I won't be making that mistake again!

Ah, etymology -- possibly the most fascinating of all armchair pursuits :-D . --pmj (talk) 10:05, 9 June 2008 (UTC)