User talk:UnicornTapestry

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Hello, UnicornTapestry! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Image:Wikisigbutton.png or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! -Panser Born- (talk) 14:32, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

[edit] Adoption

Hi, UnicornTapestry. I noticed you were offering adoption, so I'd like to offer you my services. If you accept, please respond on my talk page. Thanks, - G1ggy Talk/Contribs 02:41, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits to Wii

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I've noticed that you've been adding your signature to some of your article contributions. This is a simple mistake to make and is easy to correct. For future reference, the need to associate edits with users is taken care of by an article's edit history. Therefore, you should use your signature only when contributing to talk pages, the Village Pump, or other such discussion pages. For a better understanding of what distinguishes articles from these type of pages, please see What is an article?. Again, thanks for contributing, and enjoy your Wikipedia experience! Thank you. TJ Spyke 09:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for correcting my correction, Jeff!

(I misunderstood the heading capitalization guidelines.)

--UnicornTapestry (talk) 12:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem. There are seemingly rules for everything here <sigh>. Jeffpw (talk) 12:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Contributing "neutrally and anonymously"

I don't want to bring my involvement into the article. In other words, I'd like to contribute my knowledge from that time, but do it neutrally and anonymously. Can you suggest a way to accomplish this?

Well, if contributing as "UnicornTapestry" wouldn't be anonymous enough, you could literally "contribute anonymously" by logging out - your contributions would be identified by your IP address, but that's unavoidable if you don't want them to be identified by your account; all contents are identified in the history.

"Neutrally" is just a matter of tone. Guy Harris (talk) 09:16, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] comp.arch

Yes. Guy Harris (talk) 08:29, 15 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:JohnLeeHooker TheHealer1.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:JohnLeeHooker TheHealer1.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 08:41, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

{{helpme}}

I'm trying to upload a snapshot of the album cover, but I could use some help. Thanks.
Image:JohnLeeHooker_TheHealer1.jpg
The Healer (album)
You have the fair use template, but you must write a fair use rationale. See the fair use policy to learn how to do this. There's a convenient template you can fill in ({{Non-free use rationale}}) to make this process easier. NF24(welcome, 2008!) 12:50, 1 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Eurythmics UltimateCollection.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Eurythmics UltimateCollection.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 11:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Procol Harum

Just a quick note to advise you that changing "English" to "British", although correct in this case, is not a "grammatical correction", as your edit note suggests. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 19:03, 7 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Eurythmics UltimateCollection.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Eurythmics UltimateCollection.png. 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) 20:15, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] boskops

No offense, brother, but "JSTOR 232" is meaningless. JSTOR contains about a gazillion academic articles and JSTOR 232 ain't one of 'em. I really meant no harm, but I thought that your comment did not build on the efforts we were making... But, perhaps, if you want to add a properly cited article, maybe you could add something to the Boskops article itself? Smilo Don (talk) 17:42, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

Hi, I've removed those two additional links. The scientific american link is from 2002 and not about the movie but about creationist claims in general (indeed, the response by SciAm to the movie is right above that)- the other link is from a website devoted to murder mysteries and thus seems to be pretty far outside their area of expertise. JoshuaZ (talk) 01:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Although I'm not 'religious' about the deletions, I thought they were valuable:
* The Scientific American article's 2nd and 3rd pages (if I remember right), refuted assertions made in the movie.
* The Criminal Brief (a web site largely about writing), contained links and analysis I hadn't seen elsewhere.
If you felt either wasn't appropriate, I respect that.
--UnicornTapestry (talk) 02:42, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, I think it wouldn't be a bad idea to restore Criminal Brief then- it might make sense to bring up on the talk page and see what others think. As to my userpage message, I don't think I've noticed that before and I don't know how long it was like that- "send" should just be removed. Thanks for catching that. JoshuaZ (talk) 13:52, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
The Scientific American Expelled page includes a link to the older article as "further reading", so that's already covered. Best to discuss the Criminal Brief on the talk page – is it notable for expert opinion, or otherwise meet WP:RS? . . dave souza, talk 14:34, 5 May 2008 (UTC)