User talk:Walter Ching

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, 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! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Longhair | Talk 10:03, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Image:Canonizationescriva.jpg has been listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Canonizationescriva.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.


Hi Walter,

Alecmconroy has also proposed the deletion of your picture Image:PerottetOpusDeisupernumerary.jpg. I would recommend to save the file and eventually put it into Commons. --Túrelio 14:55, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] commons:

If you need any help transferring images, just let me know! I am commons:User:pfctdayelise as well.

Hmm. I just had a look at your contribs and the images seem to be missing... what happened? :?

--pfctdayelise 04:01, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I actually meant if you need any help using commons, getting used to the commons system, etc, but I see that I didn't explain myself very clearly. Sorry. :)
I am quite busy these few weeks, but I will try and help if I get a chance. Happy editing, pfctdayelise 03:07, 17 January 2006 (UTC)


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate your creation of the article, James Martin (Jesuit writer), but we cannot accept copyrighted text borrowed from other web sites or printed material. Please see Wikipedia:Copyright problems for more information on this topic, or generally, Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. Please do not remove the copyright violation notice placed in the article or repost the suspected infringing text. However, if you would like to rewrite the article in your own words, follow the link in the posted notice to create a temporary subpage. If your new article is appropriate, and not a further copyright violation, the reviewing administrator will move that new article into place once the copyright status of the original has been resolved. Happy editing! Douglas Whitaker 19:21, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Images of the American HQ

Hi Walter, could you help us get some photos of the American Opus Dei Headquarters. This was discussed at the mediation. I'd appreciate your help. Thanks. Thomas 01:28, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Walter! Thanks a lot for your ideas on the photos. :) After more thinking, I am convinced that it still is the right way to go. The building is beautiful and it portrays Opus Dei's middle-of-the-world culture quite well. I asked for it from the US HQ itself and they gave permission quite easily. Thanks anyway! Thomas 02:39, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Opus Dei article history

Thank you for your query, and the answer is yes.  :) I went ahead and added in my best guess as to the IDs of the various article versions +/- 24 hours. If any are wrong, and you know which precise version that should be used, please let me know the diff, and I'll get the template updated for you. :) --Elonka 01:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I think I've got it fixed, please take a look when you have a moment.  :) Also, you had some good ideas on changing the template! Can I get you to post them at Template talk:ArticleHistory? That'd be the best place to get approval for them. Best, Elonka 06:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Smoe small misunderstanding on Talk:Opus Dei...

Hmm, honestly I do not understand about half of what you wrote, and from the other half I can easily infer you did not understand what I did. 1) as to your conditional apology, the premise is not true, so none needed. 2) if by "has been contrued", you meant by me (B4H), you would be wrong. Honestly. OTOH if you really meant "could too easily be construed in general", I would heartily agree and in fact that was my entire point. The next point adds good context: 3) I simply disagree there can be any nontrivial suppression of either kind you mention, or any other I can think of, in this type of project, unless the definition chosen is a logical consequence of Wikipolicy and structure itself, and thus an empty issue in the context of one article. Adding "glaring" evokes images of vandalous deletions and such. When your edits show to not be reversions of that type of thing, reactions can vary from "he really meant something quite less serious" (my reaction) to "It's what? ...better keep an eye on this guy!..." I hope you agree which respective faith assuming is good and which is bad. Baccyak4H (Yak!) 03:20, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

An addition: now I understand that last paragraph. 4) What I actually was intending to due was to contrast your good name with the most clearly not such so as to make the clearest possible false outcome in the absurdum type of argument, to contest your strawmen labeling. It wasn't a comparison at all. I am aware of that type of association fallacy but only conceived of it in the comparison sense, never the contrast sense. But yeah, if that's how you took it, my apologies whose retrospective acceptance I acknowledge. I only point out that there was an alternate good faith, albeit sloppy, interpretation.

By the way, if this helps, I want to point out that I think your edits to that article are quite good; I don't know much about the topic but was mildly involved in some disputes some time ago. My only critique would be that (I think) you tend to use stronger language than what is ideal sometimes. I point that out because maybe that's just you, since in a nutshell that was the point about your edit summary Talk page comments. But please note it is not a coincidence that AFAIR I haven't reverted any of it, so I consider the matter small. The perfect should not be the enemy of the good. Baccyak4H (Yak!) 03:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I think you have a legitimate concern, but I guess we differ on how best to describe it, and that's OK if we both recognize it. But I do not wish to continue this type of hair splitting on usertalk pages; the effort is better spent on the articles. Thanks again, and let's carry on. Baccyak4H (Yak!) 20:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:IESEbusinessschoolopusdeicorporatework.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:IESEbusinessschoolopusdeicorporatework.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 15:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You deserve this

Hi Walter, :) I've just been given this and am passing it on to you, because you deserve it for all the work you've put in.

This user helped promote the article Opus Dei to good article status.

Hope you can continue helping in bringing the article up to FAC. Marax (talk) 01:03, 17 March 2008 (UTC) P.S. I took the initiative to place it as well in your userpage but you might want it moved elsewhere.