Loading AI tools
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an archive of past discussions about User:John Vandenberg. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
1 - 2004 — July 7, 2007 |
A poll is currently being conducted at Talk:Ftr#Requested move to decide whether to move the article to FTR (bus). Your input would be appreciated. --Jorvik 10:25, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Tell you what - I'll userfy it for you if you want, and if you're able to improve the article now that the school is open, it can be moved back then. --Coredesat 05:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi John, I have installed your User:Jayvdb/Deletion sorting tool but nothing seems to show on my headers when I am in a AfD page. My total monobook.js is:
// Script from User:AndyZ/peerreviewer.js importScript('User:AndyZ/peerreviewer.js'); //User:AndyZ/peerreviewer.js importScript('User:AzaToth/twinkle.js'); importScript('Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/delsort.js'); DelsortConfig = { debugLevel : 0, watchDelsortedLists : 1, watchDelsortedAfd : 1, shortcuts : ['Authors','Australia','Lists'] }
In article space I have tags for csd, last, rpp, prod and xfd. When I am in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicole bourne, for example, there are no new tags. What am I doing wrong? I just took the peerreview stuff out to see if it conflicts but it makes no difference. I'm using Firefox. Cheers, Brian. --Bduke 07:34, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
importScript('User:Quarl/util.js'); importScript('User:Quarl/wikipage.js')
do? Is it something extra, over and above the Mandatory stuff? Thanks for all this. It looks as if it really helps deletion sorting. --Bduke 10:37, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
--Bduke 00:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
A different matter. The line in my monobook.js:-
importScript('User:AndyZ/peerreviewer.js'); //User:AndyZ/peerreviewer.js
Are you still interested in creating a Journals WikiProject? I have been considering proposing something similar, and would be keen to participate. Espresso Addict 03:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
I've redone the Goetz school article on my user pages and made some other comments at the bottom of the deletion-review discussion. I'm asking editors to comment on the changes I've made because they represent a new development, one I think we can form a pretty wide consensus around. I think the article as I've redone it meets the objections of many editors, and it certainly meets WP:V. Please take a look, but I think this deletion review will close today or early tomorrow, so please don't delay, act now and take advantage of this limited-time offer! Noroton 16:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
What do you think about using categories rather than the bullet'ed "Note: This debate has been included in the"? The category could be removed after the AfD was closed. Mrand T-C 22:44, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
I've just been looking with interest at your amendments to Asif Mengal. Firstly, are you 100% sure it's the same Asif Mengal in all the citations? Both Asif and Mengal are common enough names. The deputy secretary to the C.M. appears to be a civil service appointment as that's what the others are. (In case you're wondering (I did), DCO = District Coordination Officer.) The Jirga reference talks about Muhammed Asif Mengal. I'm very reluctant to go too far on these without cast-iron sources given the current political repression/turmoil in Balochistan. Anyhow, this is all fascinating stuff.... ROGER TALK 09:48, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
You might want to revisit your !vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joint Venture (music); the discography listed in the article was for a different band with the same name (and the band up for deletion was not on that notable label). Precious Roy 14:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Moved to userspace as requested. Sr13 04:46, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
I always see you in AFD alot where you are a voice of reason there, and you do have some article writing experience and I'm wondering if you are interested in a RFA, as you do need the admin tools. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 20:25, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
This is the best link I could find Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship, let me know once you are ready to accept a nomination. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 02:10, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Have seen the work you've been doing to beef up those WA shopping centres this morning, great going. I'm sitting on twenty articles at the moment from local papers, the west, and major trade publications which between breaks I'll be expanding the article and adding to accordingly. Also have a whole lot of info on the changing of hands around the time the last extensions occurred at the end of the 90's. Keep in touch. Thewinchester (talk) 02:12, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm - when I saw that - ok if it links with lots of other articles - the lack of historical material will make it a lame duck. Call out if you want refs. Good to check to see how other cities like Adelaide etc have similar articles. good start - but lots of work to do SatuSuro 08:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Stephen Tweedie, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. mms 16:42, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Not sure if this is out of order, but there's a somewhat contentions AfD (here) that has received little outside attention. Since the AfD was initiated, a number of single purpose accounts (likely sockpuppets) have started editing (and discussing on the talk page) the article; not !voting, fortunately. In any case, I wanted to see if some AfD regulars could stop by and weigh in. I'm not looking to sway !votes here—I haven't targeted deletionists; I'm asking editors that seem to !vote a lot on music-related AfDs. No reply is necessary but your opinion is valued. Pr 2.0 13:27, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
re: this edit; I thought the "challenge" half had been fulfilled when the unreferenced tag was placed and dated, over a year ago. I was trying to selectively engage the second half of "Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed." The tag does explicitly state that material may be removed. So what did I do wrong? 24.4.253.249 10:28, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
While I appreciate your efforts to provide better sources in articles, the discovery that you are following me around rather than respond to my post above has really creeped me out. 24.4.253.249 20:31, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Just wanted to say how much I appreciate this tool. It makes deletion sorting so much easier. I was working on something similar once, but my javascript really wasn't good enough. the wub "?!" 11:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
John, the tool seems to fail in cases where the Afd article is not the first. This happened with Railpage Australia. It reported that the article did not exist. Sorry, I did not copy down the details. Remove that entry from the deletion sorting Australia page and then try to add it back. I added it by hand. --Bduke 00:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm getting an error on "viewAfdNode.previousSibling.nodeValue = ' — (Afd: ';" in delsort.js in the logs, but I'm not sure what, if anything, has gone wrong. --Bduke 00:23, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
The "Delsort" link appears against the entry when you are viewing the log file for the day, but it does not appear when the log file is transcluded in Wikipedia:Deletion today. The new page is quite useful, bringing everything together in one place. Could the tool be altered to make the "Delsort" link appear there too? --Bduke 22:26, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
This file may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading Image:Chess Monthly 1857 Issue 1.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 after seven 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 01:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
The person who uploaded these images to Wikibooks claimed that they created them (PD-self template was given to these images). --Derbeth talk 16:10, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Image:FAC 026.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 22:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey there. First off, thanks for the help; much appreciated.
In most "discographies", the accepted format is (in order) 1: Release Number, 2: Artist Name, 3: Release Title, 4: Format, 5: Year released.
I think we should follow this structure (and switch around the current Title/Release format) as it makes it easier to scan for specific artist releases (and in this case reinforces the Factory numbering system).
Opinion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Holdnyc (talk • contribs) 03:15, 9 August 2007
Also, while I have "release dates" on ALL Factory numbers, most would have to be listed twice, as the "Factory" release date, and the "Corrected" release date, as Factory was notoriously late on most all releases. As such, I think it probably best NOT to list either.
Again, your opinion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Holdnyc (talk • contribs) 03:17, 9 August 2007
Segger Microcontroller Systems is up for deletion again. You commented before; perhaps you might care to comment again. —EncMstr 17:27, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Actually, the image was for the time when wikisource was needing a logo. What should i do about it.--The editor1 11:37, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Please instantly see on Talk:Rigveda#Dating the Rgveda : Suggestions -Vinay Jha 22:05, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
If you regret it so much, why did you do it? This is where I was told this should go. Thanks for telling me otherwise, I'd not know.Rlevse 02:24, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I have replaced the book infobox image on Journey to the Center of the Earth with a PD image, moving Image:JulesVerne AJounreyToTheCentreOfTheEarth.jpg down further. Do you recall where you obtained that picture from? if it is PD, we can move it to Wikimedia Commons. John Vandenberg 07:55, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
This was an unfortunate edit. I've fixed it. Michael Hardy 20:35, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on ComSoc, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because ComSoc is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting ComSoc, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 02:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Notability = significance + importance. -- But|seriously|folks 04:57, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. I've recently been involved in some discussions about journals, and I was directed to User:Jayvdb/Journals. The discussions I'm talking about were at User talk:DGG#Impact factors, User talk:DGG#what journal articles should have as content and User talk:Geogre#IRC and AfD. Would you be interested in getting things going again with this proposed WikiProject? I'd probably be most interested in working on categories and the history of journals. The modern journals send me to sleep, but the 19th and early 20th century ones can be fascinating to research. Let me know what you think. Carcharoth 13:50, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I'll be creating your RFA nom in the next few days, the first week of classes haven't done much. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 21:51, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I'll create it tonight, I been busy with class and with WP:SPORTS. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup Sports! 16:33, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jayvdb. I normally would have done a more detailed nom (time issues). Thanks Jaranda wat's sup Sports! 02:21, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
If you can remember, let me know when my wikisource stuff gets deleted. Then I'll fix my articles. I already have the stuff on my own computer. Rlevse 23:30, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I did not realize annual was a possible synonym for yearbook, 'til I looked at the latter article. Good catch! —johndburger 18:07, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jayvdb,
I almost made a comment in your RfA, then thought it would be silly, and came here. Now I still feel silly, and am not sure I'm going to hit Save Page or not. I'm 99% sure you just misspoke, but please take a look at the last sentence of your answer to Q1. I assume from the remainder of your answer you mean "no fair-use", not "no public domain". I'm sure people know what you mean, but it might save you a needless followup question. --barneca (talk) 13:16, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey. Someone on the WP:PCP linked to this, and I thought it was a great, very nice, informative page. Jeske and I added a dozen more AFDs that had popped up since the creation of the page in March. MWould you mind if we could move this to, say Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon/AFD history? hbdragon88 23:24, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
So how do you delete one of the copies on the server? Or does it not matter? — Enter Movie 12:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations, I have closed your RfA as successful and you are now a sysop! If you have any questions about adminship, feel free to ask me. Please consider messaging me on IRC for access to the #wikipedia-en-admins channel. Good luck! --Deskana (talky) 08:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you to everyone for the kinds words of support! John Vandenberg 09:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations on your RFA. Just a quick note about this edit. When linking to entries on other wikipedias, you need to do so explicitly (see how I did this in my comment on the same AfD). Just using the interwiki link doesn't work. Apologies if you already knew this, as it is an easy mistake to make (I've done this in the past). Check out the version after your edit: see here. The word you were trying to link has disappered, and instead an interwiki link appears below the toolbox (lower left). Carcharoth 11:32, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Brumbys.gif. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:07, 15 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 19:07, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Hiya mate, sorry about all of this. You're right, it does look like it was taken out of a book, but unfortunately I obtained it from a website. It does make you wonder if it was even used fairly on the website I obtained it too, though. I'm sorry, but all I can give you is the link to the sight. Sixer Fixer 14:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
This request is for an automated task that another bot has already performed. Please withdraw the request as soon as possible if there are no other changes you wish to make. If no changes are made and the request is not withdrawn in two days, it will be expired.
Cheers! — madman bum and angel 03:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
yes sir i know the history of this pic image:Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai.jpg but my many photos deleted by someone , idont why ?
can u help me about that problem.
Regards,
--Mangrio 09:10, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Mangriouser talk:Mehran Mangrio
--Mangrio 09:22, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I wanted the talk page deleted because it is a talk page of a redirect with no meaningful edits made to it. It just had a wpbiography banner placed on it at one time, before the article was merged. I just don't like blank talk pags laying around :). Hope that answered your question, Psychless 01:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
The Working Man's Barnstar | ||
In appreciation for your work getting Wikipedia:WikiProject Academic Journals off the ground. I've long though we needed this and I'm glad someone with your energy got involved! JayHenry 06:47, 20 September 2007 (UTC) |
Hi. Could you please help us resolve the dispute we have with regard to the ethnic origin of the medieval historian Movses Kaghankatvatsi? Please see the talk of the article. Regards, --Grandmaster 10:58, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Lol? In what way this article has any asserts of notability? Reply here. Thank you.--Tasc0 05:08, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I saw that you deprodded Orshabaal with the reason that it could all be merged. Usually I'm all for merging, and I've never prodded an article before, but the problem with that article is that as a player of that game I know that almost all the information (which appears to be original research) in it is simply wrong anyway. Were I to remove the incorrect information, we'd be left with the creature's name, someone's little essay on where they think the name came from, and the creature's ingame "loot", which is just considered game guide content and inappropriate anyway. I'd be happy to merge it, but I really don't see what can be merged other than the fact that there is in fact a monster called Orshabaal which is a boss in the game Tibia. Thanks, let me know what you think or if you have any ideas. SouperAwesome 09:25, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I've just re-created Bobby Hicks as a stub, with some assertion of notability, since it got hit with WP:CSD#A7 previously. (Not my genre, so I wasn't watching.) Is there a way to bring back the text from the deleted article? best regards, __Just plain Bill 16:26, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
You recently removed a prod on the above article because it was an "old" article. The article was old but basically had not been edited in any meaningful way for a period of time. I reviewed the article as part of a review of "unclear importance" tags and found nothing that asserted importance in any searches I made. Since a school can't be speedied, (so I've been told), I used a prod. I don't buy the old explanation. If the school has notability that I missed; great!. Otherwise, I respectfully request that you review your decision. Cheers! --Stormbay 18:35, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm not trying to rescind the free license. I'm trying to get the image gone so I can reupload it later on Commons under a different username. I would prefer not to have photos that I have taken linked directly to this username for privacy reasons. Kolindigo 00:20, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
You moved it based on fair use? I would say any pictures of the band with the new lineup are vital, since the last photos we have only contain half the present lineup and were from 2 years ago. I'm too busy to sort out complicated fair use writeups, but was wondering how much thought you put into it.(The Elfoid 00:32, 1 October 2007 (UTC))
Hi, your monobook is turning up in Category:Candidates_for_speedy_deletion. John Vandenberg 02:13, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
It appears you noticed I had the same problem, thanks for fixing it. Camaron1 | Chris 21:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
The user was blocked indefinitely. User talk:Mhart54com/Archive 1 and User talk:Mhart54com/Archive 2 are just taking up space. Why should they stay? They should be deleted. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:57, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
This image was uploaded as part of a long feud on Talk:Prabir Ghosh, which was removed on grounds of being inappropriate and violating No Personal Attacks. I flagged it as no context, because there is no specific db category for images. It is also obviously not English. Michaelbusch 05:34, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Have you noticed the fine print on the {{prod}} template? It says "You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to its deletion for any reason. To avoid confusion, it helps to explain why you object to the deletion, either in the edit summary or on the talk page." (Caniago 06:15, 2 October 2007 (UTC))
Thanks for assessing the articles Banknotes of the Swakopmund Bookshop (South West Africa) and Banknotes of the British Solomon Islands Protectorate for copyright violations. However, I'm a bit confused as to the criteria used in the decisions you took and wondered if you could explain why, in the first, you removed the catalogue details but you made no changes to the second. As you say, with the exception of the catalogue numbers, the details do give facts but, given that the texts were lifted straight from the catalogue, I'm not sure whether the text, presented in that manner, represents a violation of Krause Publications copyright or not. I should point out that I have no connection with KP, I'm more worried that they could cause trouble in the future if they discover their catalogues being plagiarized in Wikipedia.
Dove1950 09:48, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed that you reverted my {{Db-badfairuse}} edit to Image:Sandstone Formation in Golden Gate Highlands National Park01.jpg (which I originally uploaded). My reason for tagging it for deletion was that it is possible to get a free image of the park by actually going there, and so it is not permissible for Wikipedia per WP:NFCC#1. I'm glad that the picture is permissible in Golden Gate Highlands National Park, but I'm finding WP:NFCC confusing! Bláthnaid 12:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
FWIW, I used db-disambig on 1 Litre of Tears (disambiguation) because it only disambiguates one entry. The wikilink in the intro paragraph is not a dab entry -- that's the base name primary topic. If there were no primary topic, then the two links would be entries on the base name dab. Cheers! -- JHunterJ 11:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
No problem. I noticed the trouble, didn't know how to research to fix, so I left the flag knowing some other editor could handle it. -- Rpyle731 from a public computer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.4.145.66 (talk) 22:39, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Silly me, sometimes your signature displays as John Vandenberg (spelled out in full), other times as Jayvdb. Both, however, always point to User:Jayvdb. My confusion was at first that these were different users! Then I thought you had two accounts, because you'd been on Wiki for a long time, maybe you used one from work, another from home or something. My confusion, sorted now. <blush> Sorry to waste your time on that one. Alastair Haines 02:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry about not putting references on that article. Have a look at the talk page if you want some more references to add. The history so far has been absolutely fascinating. Hope you found it as interesting as I have! One thing I haven't put in there yet is the prediction of positronium, which (according to that article) was first published in this journal. We probably also want to get the German Wikipedia people to check lots of this from German sources. Maybe bounce it back and forth a bit. What is amazing, I think, is seeing the journal staying fairly constant, while human history swirls around it. From Danish royal patronage, through the Third Reich and the Cold War, changing languages and territories, going through ups and downs, but still surviving (just). Anyway, more on the scientific content would be good, but I'm leaving this again for a bit now. Thanks again for coming in and filling in references! Carcharoth 04:00, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi.
Sorry if my English isn't good, I'm not native speaker.
Uptown (as you can see in their homepage ) was a group of fans and collectors colleting information about Prince from different sources, even doing some kind of research to get unofficial information.
They published many magazines and books with information they collected until 2005. They were probably the most important source of information about Prince (if you wanted more than the "official" news) before Internet forum's became popular. Due to the Internet boom and legal threats from Prince lawers they stopped working by 2005.
So I think they deserve a Wikipedia entry.
And I'd like to comment other deleted entry: 1-800 New Funk.
It's a music album by Prince (mainly) and other artist. But it was deleted because somebody considered it an advertisement of a phone line. But it isn't, it's an album page (you can see these links: album cover and songs , lyrics and Wikipedia page of Prince discography with an entry for 1-800 New Funk in 1994 )
During some time Prince used that phone number to sell his music, but now it's not working. So I think it had to be undelete (perhaps with a disclaimer explaining the different meanings of the entry).
Yours,
--El Pantera 17:40, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
I am sorry you felt it necessary to oppose my recent RfA, which did not succeed. I will attempt to get more experience in the main namespace and the Wikipedia namespace and will try again for RfA in two month's time. I hope I will have satisfied your concerns by then, but if not, please comment as you feel you should. Thanks for participating in my RfA. -- Cobi(t|c|b|cn) 08:01, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Obvious choice. Journal of Biblical Literature. Thanks for this encouragement and help. It will set an example for others in our field to work from for many other needed articles. Alastair Haines 01:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for this tip-off John. I think this is actually important. I know there is a cult group that base bizarre theology on an insistance that the whole NT was originally composed in Aramaic. The idea that Matthew may have been originally in Aramaic is quite mainstream, but inconclusive. A collection of quotations from church fathers relevant to the discussion is a very helpful collection of "primary" sources (they are, of course, secondary or less).
I will confirm that they accurately reflect the sources they claim to quote (I wish we had the Greek or Latin), and pitch in to the discussion.
Shouldn't stop me getting to the library for early copies of JBL though. ;) Alastair Haines 07:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Jayvdb. The tool appears to insert additions to category Albums and songs into the comment field at the head of the section, so that the added entry is not visible on the page. For example: --Rrburke(talk) 13:49, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
The WikiProject welcomes two new members in the past three months:
The WikiProject is now halfway done, numerically, with the 1000 articles identified in December 2006. The first (oldest) 500 articles have been claimed, reviewed, and (when needed, which was almost all cases) improved. Moreover, given the passage of time, many of articles 501 through 1000 have been worked on by other editors (it's ten months since that list was generated). So reviewing the second half of the 1000 articles should be easier.
Section 6 (articles 501 through 600 on the list) has been organized differently than the previous five sections. First, blocks are (roughly) five articles each, rather than 10, making it easier for you to claim and finish a block. Second, perhaps more importantly, each block consists of similar pages; if you're interested in fixing disambiguation pages, there are blocks of those; if you're interested in articles (which is what the project originally started out being), there are blocks of those; and there is one block of lists and one of redirects (mostly redirects to articles). So, fewer surprises this time when you claim a block.
In addition, since the project now has 25 active members (though some are likely inactive), having more blocks will make it easier to spread the editing around.
If you received this newsletter on your user talk page and don't want to receive such postings in the future, please move your name, in the participants section of the WikiProject, to the "Inactive" subsection.
This newsletter is being delivered by Anibot; it was written by John Broughton. Please post any comments about it to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Abandoned Articles, in a section separate from the newsletter itself.
Delivered by Anibot 00:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
why did you revert the deletion request for these pages? they appear to be valid author deletion requests. John Vandenberg 01:14, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
IN regards to: permission for AhR.jpg
Hi, on Image:AhR.jpg you have tagged it as public domain, and then IP addresses have claimed it is used with permission from the journal(s) it appeared in. I suspect that the image is not public domain, but if you can explain how permission has been granted, we can probably find another tag to keep the bots away. John Vandenberg 04:52, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
-I was the IP address, I forgot to log in. I received permission for both images on the AhR page from each journals copyright office to place the images on the Wiki article. The appropriate labeling of each image is in the figure description and must remain as such as per the journals.
Demantos 11:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm still relatively new to Wiki and would appreciate the help fixing the images. Like I said, I have written (email) permission from each journal to use the images in the Wiki article as long as the permission statement is included in each figure legend. Demantos 12:03, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
You may want to challenge my reponse to your AfD vote. I ask that you consider my argument and change your vote to merge. Robert K S 05:45, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi! I need to inform you that I've protected Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Changes since I last edited because it allows users to add code to the javascript of other users. If you are an admin, you are still able to edit it, but if you are not an admin, please copy and paste it into your userspace to continue modifying it. We can set up a message at the old javascript page telling users to change their links. If you need help, please contact me or User:Eagle_101. Thanks, --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹnoɟʇs 00:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Just delete the John Long thing. It was supposed to be a primary source for the Christian Conventions article here on WP. The idea was that, given few secondary sources for the topic a primary one could be useful, but only if it were in the public domain. Unfortunately I never fully figured out if we could put that in the public domain via WikiSource and kind of gave up.
As to the background information on John Long... he was apparently the first 'preaching companion' of William Irvine (not particularly notable) and his son gave written permission for scans of the diary to go online under a non-commercial CC license. The scans were sourced from a lady who published photos of the diary and Long's son here. Donama 05:21, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Ceyockey talk page permalink for reference
There are a lot of things being examined at User:Ceyockey/Notifying WikiProjects of Deletion Proposals, some of which can be addressed by a bot. The page was designed more for information gathering to assist manual delsorting a) of PROD'd articles and b) with a WikiProject focus, one aim being c) to encourage by action the use of the DelSorting concept across the breadth of WikiProjects. Some WikiProjects have embraced PROD-notification as an active workstream while others are actively opposed; many are indifferent. I'll compose a section of the page some time in the next week or two that relates some of my thoughts on what might be automatable and I'll give you a shout here when that gets started so we can discuss in more detail. As far as bot authoring, I've not done it before, but considering I know basic Perl I think I could learn how to compose the code for one in a reasonable period of time; however, working with an experienced bot author would be the most efficient way to go. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 12:14, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
I did get to the library on Friday. Early serials are available on microfiche. I will put some time into those next week.
I also discovered that one of the serials was simply reports of minutes from the various chapters of SBL. This serial was from the late 50s but may provide insights into the workings of the society.
The society will have an international conference in New Zealand in 2008.
Apart from one appointment on Monday morning, my time is fairly flexible next week.
Cheers, Alastair Haines 04:28, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:CAULmed.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 18:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
I just got home after proudly copying a few hundred pages of JBL early journals. And what do you know, only the last page actually got sent. :((
I hope the full file still exists on the library computer somewhere, I'll aim to get there early tomorrow morning.
The priority is info on the society and journal, not the text of articles, so I'm starting in on that now.
Cheers Alastair Haines 06:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Could you help out at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dim 3? My deletion recomendation may have been harsh and an expert opinion may be needed. I feel the guys begging to keep it need some expert encouragement or discouragement, depending on your viewpoint.--Gavin Collins 15:25, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Can you help me with this list? You seem knowledgable based on your update last year to David Farrow Maxwell. If you are too busy, can you direct me to a source I can use for the list. --Dr who1975 20:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I've removed the "Under Construction" tag.
It's far from thoroughly researched, each line really needs double checking and verifying to be sure of dates and dig up printers and confirm each is notable.
But it's now best passed to experts, its a solid enough start for a first 24 hours.
I've been caught up the last two days but will be in the library again tomorrow. I will check for the scans, and reproduce them if necessary.
I found a couple of useful sources that were not available online, one was from the Times Literary Supplement earlier this year. If I can manage it, I will also check Sydney Uni library for TLS tomorrow.
I found googling for information on JBL difficult because articles from it are cited all over the web. You must have had this difficulty with other journals, do you have a trick for getting around it? Alastair Haines 13:16, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jayvdb! Long time, no talk to... Back when I was a very new user, you helped me out with a couple of questions. Now I'm looking for some help with a new user who's stomping all over some articles that we at WP:BIRD have been working on (one FA, a couple not). S/he has been putting "Update", "Verify", "Old", etc. boxes at the top, and ignoring requests from several of us to explain why the boxes are being added. (The verify box, for example, was at the top of a FA with 79 citations!)They've also been added into the middle of taxobox templates, which means those are no longer displaying properly; instead, long strings of programming text are displaying. Several of us are in danger of violating the 3RR rule trying to keep the articles readable. What do you suggest we do next? MeegsC | Talk 17:15, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Rivoniaraid-star.gif. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Edu-Boycott-1955-03.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Hello Jayvdb,
please send your real-name, your wikiname, your prefered login-name and the public part of your ssh-key to . We plan to create your account soon then. --DaB. 16:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
P.S: Please speak with the projects, before you beginn to move images to commons. --88.68.193.166 16:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Your comments to the uploader of this image were IMHO quite bad as it is highly doubtful it is in the Public Domain. It seems he has taken the easy way out and claimed PD for an image that is obviously professional and copyright. Timeshift 16:37, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
It seems that Apollo is continuing to revert to microeconomic only, he is unable to accept including both micro and macro, and from his insistance on this single version and accepting no compromises, I think he is going to continue to insist on his specific version. I would appreciate some authority to be used with his continual reverts with absolutely no compromise taken on board from me, or offered by him. Timeshift 06:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Greetings Jayvdb, it was really nice to meet you today. I uploaded some images and added them to the meetup page here, but I thought you might enjoy the one at right; it's an absolute gem! :) Cheers, Sarah 14:48, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't recall where I got it. Almost certainly from an edition of one of his books or from a work "in honor of." However, he died in 1910, and I'm sure the picture was taken before his death, so in all likelihood it is public domain. If you would like me to expend some effort in tracking down the source, I can try, but it won't be immediate. Thanks. —Dfass (talk) 15:22, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.