User talk:Wikipedia brown

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Wikipedia brown, 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! 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 place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! JFW | T@lk 12:14, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Gee

What a great user name! (Really.) As a childhood fan of Encyclopedia Brown, I must say I'm jealous I didn't think of it. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:50, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Cool, another Cornellian. We seem fairly well-represented on Wikipedia; or maybe I just tend to notice them more. Of course at this point, thinking about being class of '92 is starting to make me feel just old...

A chime in to what Bunchofgrapes said; I'm incredibly jealous as well. Happy editing to you! Te ke 00:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh and as for what's up with vandals, no one knows. We just fight 'em, and we win. Te ke 00:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! It's incredibly encouraging to know that other Encyclopedia Brown fans are Wikipedians too. And it's really nice for you to appreciate my name (I don't think many people get the reference)! Wikipedia brown 18:15, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Sheesh, look at this pretender: User:Leroyencyclopediabrown ;-) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:48, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Bono_patriotic_jacket.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bono_patriotic_jacket.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:57, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Plasmagnetic leviwhatever

There are several wonderful documents regarding all the arcaine technicalities about plasmagnetic levitation, but one needs to buy them from hovertech to read them. Unfortunatly, I do not have the resources to obtain the se documents. Random task 01:21, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:22961 lg.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:22961 lg.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. feydey 14:08, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bathinda - Cleaned Up

Please review the page Bathinda. I have cleaned it up considerably and also added new information. - Anand Singh Brar 12:53, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edun

I agree with your removal of the reference to Ali Hewson's clothing range. But just for your own information, it is called Edun (I thought it was some exotic Irish name - turns out it is just "nude" in reverse). I am surprised there is no wikipedia article on it. website: [1] --Merbabu 09:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] U2 themes

Please be bold and put forward any ideas, even if "half-arsed". Maybe just put them in U2 talk if you are not confident about them. Others can then develop them. see U2 talk page. "Dream out loud" --Merbabu 15:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] U2 FA nomination

While I love your enthusiam and your pro-activity, it might be better to at least inform some of the "usual suspect" editors of the U2 article before we nominate it as an FAC. Of course, you are not obliged to, but I for one would have advised against it at this stage, but such a notification would have spurred me into action - there is a whole lot of things i would like to do to improve the article but never got around to. But, it's not that much fun doing it under the madness of FAC. Perhaps I should leave a note on the talk page. Anyway, happy to discuss anytime. regards Merbabu 01:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 5 March

OK, I'll try and look at it later tonight. If you haven't heard from me in a couple of days, you are allowed to drop me a rude note demanding my attention. ;-) Cheers. Merbabu 00:41, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding your edit to U2:

Your recent edit to U2 (diff) was reverted by an automated bot. The edit was identified as adding either test edits, vandalism, or link spam to the page or having an inappropriate edit summary. If you want to experiment, please use the preview button while editing or consider using the sandbox. If this revert was in error, please contact the bot operator. Thanks! // VoABot II 22:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

They should rename this bot to CRAZY_BOT_9000. Wikipedia brown 22:59, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] U2 picture

I like the new picture! It's so much better than the ones I found. If the author's only request is to be attributed, that's fine. The only thing is that you need to make sure to forward the email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org so that an administrator with OTRS access can verify the permission. As an example, see this picture I uploaded. Pretty much, we need to have proof of an image's source/copyright status, and this does this without making private emails available to the public. Oh, and make sure to include a link to where you uploaded the file when you forward the email. But other than that, everything looks in order, and it's an awesome picture. ShadowHalo 01:35, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see the problem; I must have misread it the first time. The problem is that, from your description, there is permission to use it on Wikipedia but not anywhere else. If you did actually have permission to use the image in general (not just on Wikipedia), then you can either copy and paste that part of the email as proof. ShadowHalo 20:37, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, the photographer has to allow anyone to use the image for any purpose in order for us to be able to use it, but he can still put some conditions like attribution on it. Sorry for the confusion. ShadowHalo 20:48, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About maintaining U2

I haven't been much of an "active" user lately, so I won't add myself to the list right now... thanks for remembering, though! --Kristbg 14:58, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Explanation

I posted a response here. The author allowing for the picture to be used on any website still isn't sufficient permission as that limits newspapers, etc. and therefore isn't free to the fullest extent but the author allowing for the picture to be used for any purpose providing he is credited is perfectly fine. Of course you should forward the permission to permissions@wikimedia.org as stated above. The free licenses I mentioned basically allow the picture to be free and more specifically the CC-BY 2.5 (Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License) is very similar to allowing any use provided the author is attributed (CC-BY-SA makes it so any derivative work has to be licensed under the same CC-BY-SA license so if I edit an image that is under CC-BY-SA, I have to release it under CC-BY-SA too, maintaining the cycle of freeness). If you have any more questions feel free to ask me on my talk page as I know copyright and licensing issues can be confusing, especially to those who are new to them but even to people who are more experienced with them. Yonatan (contribs/talk) 03:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] U2 improvements

The article is a lot better than it was, but i still don't think it will get FA just yet. The themes and influences section is good. Although, the list of influence could be re-examined. Are there some there that are not notable, and others we've forgotten? Can you believe that the Joshua Tree section previously just listed single release dates and a few more stats? I like the quote boxes. It allows us to be a bit more descriptive and 'colourful' in our language, while not disturbing the flow of the more straight-down-the-line main text.

I always wanted to tidy up and improve the Pop, Achtung, ATYCLB and Bomb sections like i did with J Tree and U Fire. Although some are long enough, (almost too long?), they can all do with a quality check - i'm sure there is stronger info that can replace weak info there. I think the new album section is a bit messy and too long. It shouldn't be a running commentary of the latest quotes regarding it's production. An encyclopedia should state notable info that won't really change, it's not a fan site. Oh, and the pics are shocking. I will try and work on this too. Have a look on Flickr - i actually fouind one and got permission, but then I can't find it now. GAH!!!

Let me have a read over the next few days with a print out, and I will see if i can find more. Merbabu 12:55, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: You are me

I'm not quite sure what that means, but I think I'll take it as a compliment, lol.

Do you mean that we like the same things? Like Technocracy? BTW if you're interested in it, you could come check out the forums at Technocracy.ca --Hibernian 18:56, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question

Would you mind removing Image:TheOffice(US)1-02.jpg from your userpage? Fair use images can only be used in the article mainspace (see WP:FUC). Anyway, I wanted to ask you if there was a connection between your username and this. ShadowHalo 11:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wiki

Hello Wikipedia brown; I noticed that Craig Ferguson is in your list of favorite articles, and I recently proposed a craig ferguson wiki on the requests wikia, and wanted to know if you would like to contribute to it if it gets accepted. Brain40 21:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Policy wikilinking

Hey Brown, through out the whole discussion about the U2 album sales, I noticed you link to Wikipedia policies using external links. This is not necessary; you can wikilink to them like so: Wikipedia:No original research, no original research, or WP:NOR. It looks alot better than external links. Just to let you know. Cheers. -- Reaper X 18:23, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notability tag for Tabish Qureshi

Dear Editor, I don't understand why you have put notability tag. I have written the short wiki-stub for Tabish Qureshi, the numerous publications provided are from leading physical journals in the past 20 years, so it is well-known and recognised physicist. Of course he works and lives in India but the country does not matter, I don't think only notable US scientist should have entries in Wikipedia. I think the notability tag is not appropriate, so I think you might wish to remove it. Regards, Danko Georgiev MD 03:38, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] u2 wikiproject

Hi, I've seen you frequently around the article U2 and other related articles. Please consider joining the U2 WikiProject. If you would like to join, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project. Thank you for your time.

[edit] Edit summary

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, which wasn't included with your recent edit to Octane rating. Thank you. --Slashme (talk) 05:13, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] U2 FAC

That's fine - i will see what I can do to help. It's a fine article, but I think getting a pop culture article over to FA is going to be hard.

Peer reviews are usually pointless in my experience, but it's worth trying anyhow. You might find conflicting advice from the FAC - on U2 before we were told on the one hand "too many dates, figures, etc, not enough descriptions/colour". Then another reviewer said essentially the opposite - OK, that's an over-simplification, but hopefully you get my point. Specifically, I think you might find opposition to the text boxes - simply cos they are different, but in my opinion they add colour without being POV - well, they are POV but it is clear that they are without interfering with the flow of the non-POV text. Given that I was the one who put them in there, I am a little bias towards their keeping. My advice would be to leave if one person suggests removing them, but if there is ground swell opinion to remove, then remove them. :-)

Have you done FAC before? It can take a while. I did Indonesia FAC successfully and it was quite grueling. My strong advice is to take every suggestion seriously, even when they are big changes, but don't rush anything if they are not minor. For example, from Indonesia FAC, some of the suggestions I was most against initially quickly became some of my favourite features, while other suggestions I went along with later turned out to be not so good. Sleep on each suggestion - don't rush to change, or rush defend.

The toughest will be the prose - it is in most FACs.

Good to see you back on board, and we will be in contact soon, no doubt. kind regards --Merbabu (talk) 13:24, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Gah - you don't have e-mail enabled. Please send me an e-mail to discuss the FAC. Thanks! Although, no hard feelings if you decline. Merbabu (talk) 23:28, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a look at the article sometime within the next day. Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 00:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

"Mega-stardom"...

Removed (again). Hmm - the contribs show that I *did* remove it, then somehow it's back. Probably my mistake. By the way, what do you think of the Steve Averill mention? Did you remove it thinking it wasn't necessary. It can go if you really want. :-) --Merbabu (talk) 01:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Your last message suggests you haven't seen my latest e-mail. :-) --Merbabu (talk) 02:22, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Darnit - I leave my trail everywhere. --Merbabu (talk) 13:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TheOffice(US)1-03.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheOffice(US)1-03.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) 04:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TheOffice(US)1-04.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheOffice(US)1-04.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.

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TheOffice(US)1-05.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheOffice(US)1-05.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.

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TheOffice(US)1-06.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheOffice(US)1-06.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.

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:U2_Super_Bowl.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:U2_Super_Bowl.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. –Dream out loud (talk) 15:42, 12 February 2008 (UTC)