User talk:TonyClarke
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Tony; Hi! Welcome to the 'pedia. I hope you like it and enjoy it enough to contribute your great knowledge into our site continuously. Im honored to be the first one giving you a welcome, as usually administrators have the honor, not collaborators like me.
As a matter of a fact I do not follow the diet. I have diabetes and so well I dont even follow the diabetes diet to tell you the truth..LOL But I found your article interesting and knowledge enhancing.
I see you are from Scotland. Beautiful country. Check my article on Ken Buchanan. No doubt one of the greatest boxers from Europe, and I thought he deserved an entry here,. What happened to him as champion I think makes his life story a compelling one.
Well, Tony thats all for now. Tha nks for everything and God bless you!!
Sincerely yours, Antonio Lets get WIIILDD!! Martin
Hi Antonio, thanks for the warm welcome.
You have written a lot, I'll look up Ken Buchanan,sounds interesting. You probably don't need me to tell you you should consider a diet, the Fuhrman one is the best I have found. I know it's not easy socially or motivationally, but hey God will probably thank you for looking after that body he lent you..
I don't know if this is the right plavce to answer your note, thanks again, and no doubt we will speak again.
Tony TonyClarke 18:23 Apr 25, 2003 (UTC)
A picture of a big cat is needed, but are you sure you're allowed to use this particular picture on Wikipedia? If you got it off a Club Med web page, one would normally assume that Club Med or someone else have the copyright, which means you'll have to have explicit permission to use it elsewhere. If you got that, there should be a reference to it on the image page: Image:ClubMed.jpg. Egil 12:30 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)
No you're right I didn't havepermission and looks like I needed it so I'll remove it. Any idea how to search for copyright free images? TonyClarke 12:51 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)
- Very good question, indeed. And I don't have a very good answer. Searching your own photo album is the best place, obviously. Things funded directly by the US government, such as NASA, are often free to use. For other stuff, is certainly does not hurt asking. See Wikipedia:Boilerplate request for permission. PS: I think you need to put the Club Med image up on the Wikipedia:Votes for deletion. -- Egil 13:20 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)
- See also Wikipedia:Public domain image resources. -- Egil 22:17 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)
- Thanks Egil, I'll check these out
TonyClarke 22:30 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)
Hey, TC... we're taking issue with your bits on enzymes and digestion in Enzyme. Come rant at us on Talk:Enzyme. Graft
I edited your user page to disambiguate the link to Python programming language. Hope you don't mind.Tenbaset 05:08 7 Jul 2003 (UTC)
thanks Tenbaset, I'm sure that wast the right thing to do, one day I'll understand. TonyClarke 20:13, 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)
I have re-added links to "secularism" and "humanism" from Jesus Christ, rephrasing their context. My edit summary (see here) explains my reasoning. If you disagree, feel free to remove them again. Cheers, Cyan 00:15, 31 Oct 2003 (UTC)
We already have a page at fast food restaurant. Will fast food have a different content or should it just be a redirect? Rmhermen 14:38, Nov 8, 2003 (UTC)
Oops, thanks Rmhermen, we'll need to give this some thought, perhaps a merge is called for, I think the process or movement apprach rather than restaurant approach ismore promising, but the restourant page certainaly has some interesting and wide ranging content. TonyClarke 21:52, 8 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Hey! Thanks for the acknowledgement re Genocide. I appreciate the feedback! -- VV 09:42, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)
In Is-Ought Problem you used far too many capital letters. I moved it to is-ought problem. It is not conventional in Wikipedia to capitalize common nouns in article titles. Michael Hardy 02:19, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I don't understand why you reverted my edit to sport. I made a concerted effort to avoid deleting any information; what's "gone" from that page is now included in more specific entries such as professional sports and history of sport. You've been doing excellent work. --The Cunctator 00:21, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Thank you for your positive comments about my work.
I feel that the reworking of the article requires justification, and more basically perhaps deserved some explanation or discussion at the time. The absence of either of these led me to think that the reworking was an act of vandalism, whose reversion needed no explaination. Howere, it obviously does need some discussion now.
The article has lost something in being broken up, even though I accept your assurance that all of the original material has been preserved. There is a certain synergy in keeping all of the elements of the article together, e.g. the cumulative evidence in the original article that sport evolved from everyday activities or skills is now lost, as the art and history sections are not now read together by the casual reader. I also think that the History of sport is now less likely to be read, as it is a more specialist subject which is less likely to be looked up, even though it may be an area of question for some readers.
All in all, thank you for the work you did, but unless there is some over-riding Wikipedian policy or principle involved, I would prefer the original article to be re-instated.
TonyClarke 23:23, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Thank you for your very nice note -- I appreciate it. And I hope that you continue to preservere. It can certainly be rather challenging at times! But overall it's not half bad... -- BCorr ¤ Брайен 04:24, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I agree with your revert of fundamentalism i.e. seeing fundamentalism as a disease. The contributor should at least give example of psychologists. I dislike arguing with these people I have already argued with them on the Dutch version of Fundamentalism. I had asked one week ago examples for this on the Dutch version but I received no reply. Andries 12:46, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)