User talk:Infrogmation/Archive5

A quick heads-up. The Maya civilization article has just been "edited to make grade level appropriate". I don't know what he means (appropriate for school pupils?), but it looks to me like dumbing-down and removal of useful content. Your expert eyes would do well to take a look. –Hajor 19:41, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm glad to see it was already (very appropriately)

reverted. -- Infrogmation 17:40, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Excellent; I didn't see the revert when it happened. If the anon comes back, I'll point him towards w:simple. –Hajor 18:20, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

was no experiment, accidentally recreated article while marking for deletion. sorry. --Deelkar 22:46, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Aha. Thanks, I thought it was either that, or someone using your computor while you stepped away... Cheers, -- Infrogmation 22:48, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Then that's settled :) --Deelkar 22:50, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Are you a surrealist? Are you someone with extensive knowledge of surrealism? Are you an administrator? Are you giving preferential treatment to Daniel Boyer and his friends? Are there any pictures of anyone from the Portland Surrealist Group to prove they exist? Is there any pictures of Franklin Rosemont with Andre Breton? Are you locking the Surrealism article just to keep the facts intact for the benefit of the entire Wikipedia Community and the public?

Page protected due to revert war, in accordence with policy. Discuss on the talk page of the article. You might wish to consider choosing a user name and logging in, so you can sign comments and discussion. -- Infrogmation 22:53, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Frog, I truly appreciate the effort you made in trying to eliminate the B-Movie Bandit once and for all. Unfortunately he's back, he's reverting articles and it's business as usual for the jerk. Others are still happily formatting these stupid things since, heaven forbid, information must not be lost! Result: I've lost whatever interest that I had in contributing to this project. I'm not blanking my pages, but nor am I planning on returning. The thrill, quite honestly, is gone. Best way to reach me during the week is my work e-mail: [email protected]. I'm there during business hours, Pacific time. - Lucky 6.9 05:06, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Sorry if I put it in the wrong place. I believe I had witnessed administrators doing the same thing. I will however refrain from putting the message in the article from now on. --Richss 18:36, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)

Great. The talk pages of users who make such text is the intended place for the "test" messages. Thanks for your appropriate use of the "delete" message on such articles. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 18:56, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Infrogmation, I respect your status as an administrator but I need to kindly ask this question concerning Surrealism and its related articles. It is obvious that the people Lindall and Wigdor are being disputed in the Surrealism article, but it is a fact that the public can find both there pictures online as in regards to proving that they are not fictitous people. I do realize their is a dispute however we all know they are real people. What I am asking you, is why does Wikipedia allow articles to be written about contemporary people in regards to the Surrealist Movement and Surrealism, yet we cannot find any proof that these people even exist? I am asking to see any picture of this, "Brandon Freels" or this, "Portland Surrealist Group" because I am convinced that they do not exist and that the articles written about them is fiction. Terrance Lindall is a Surrealist and I can find enough pictures of him online to prove that he is a real person, so at least I know that this person is real and not made up. The same goes for Keith Wigdor and also Penelope Rosemont and Daniel Boyer. I must ask that you please help in clarifying this issue and not to allow fictitious articles to appear on Wikipedia about people that we are not sure that they even exist. If we all cannot find any pictures of this, "Brandon Freels" or this "Portland Surrealist Group" can you please remove the articles. I know there is a Dale Houstman and also a Zazie who is a cyber artist, the pictures of them prove that fact. Also we all know that Daniel C.Boyer is a real person. Where is the picture of, "Brandon Freels" and the, "Portland Surrealist Group"? I ask that the articles be removed if we cannot find them. Why defend something that one cannot prove? Thank You, Infrogmation, I hope that you can help.

No problem. I think I have pretty well achieved what would be called a rather nice starter stub for each otf the 26 katas. It has taken until now and I have researched in 2 highly respected volumes (with credits given, of course). I think, however, that this will have to do for tonight. I am tired. Cheers.whiskers 04:30, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Gee, thanks for the welcome -- and for your great contributions to Jazz, which was really kinda pitiful beforehand. Thanks especially for the explanation of the change from "jass" to "jazz," which I'd never heard/read before -- and gave me a chuckle :-D. Nice to read someone who has both something knowledgeable to contribute and writing skills. Peace. deeceevoice 15:07, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Policy is to only have the most specific category in a tree in an article. Since Category:New Orleans is already a sub-category of the ones I removed they are not also needed in the article itself. - SimonP 03:07, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 03:33, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Victory favours the bold -- Captain Benjamin Sisko, Star Trek Deep Space 9. EDGE 03:39, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

Please be more cautious in use of your reverts. You substituted a new and significantly improved article for a lesser one because 3-4 links were missing. This is madness. Why did you not add the links that I overlooked? This would have been far more productive. EDGE 04:15, Sep 26, 2004 (UTC)

Ahem. "Madness"? I think at worst, a difference of opinion. It's good that you add info to articles, but please do not remove appropriate info and links already there in the process. I guess I urge you to be more cautious in your editing. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 03:26, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The edits to Wikipedia:Copyright problems that I reverted after you reverted so I reverted myself again, were by a Chinese text dumper that I've already blocked from editing once because of their blatant addition of nonsense to articles. I have to go to bed now but this user needs to be watched. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 02:22, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thanks; agreed. -- Infrogmation 02:24, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hey! I've created this new notice board specifically for articles related to people from the U.S. South. If you are interested in contributing, leave a message on the page and add articles you feel need to be reviewed, contributed to, or started. Mike H 21:02, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)

The Southern Collaboration of the Week board is now up. Please vote or nominate other articles. The first voting ends on October 3. Mike H 14:23, Sep 30, 2004 (UTC)

Of course there have to be categories on redirect pages. That's the only way to get alternative names or commonly used terms into the category pages in the right places, especially when the lists are long. Where does it say no categories on redirect pages? Elf | Talk 22:44, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Redirect pages tend not to work properly when extra text is added. Categories are better added at whatever the page redirects to. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 04:21, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi Infrogmation,

I recently created a disambiguation page Gallagher. Why did you delete it? <KF> 14:37, Oct 2, 2004 (UTC)

It was a requested delete by User:Radiojon for some page move, which seems not to have been done. Your disambiguation page was moved by Radiojon to Gallagher (disambiguation). Looking at article histories, I seem to have inadvertently stepped into a disagreement between you and Radiojon as to what is best to go at the page name "Gallagher"? I was not trying to take sides; I hope it can be worked out on talk pages. As I deleted it by request, I will undelete it if you so request. -- Infrogmation 17:35, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. I had found out about the move to Gallagher (disambiguation) just before I got your message. I dropped Radiojon a line (several people have asked him/her questions about his/her page moves) and created a redirect page. Thanks again, and all the best, <KF> 17:45, Oct 2, 2004 (UTC)

"Account" already exists at Wiktionary, with quite a large entry. That's a large part of why it was speedy deleted a half-dozen times. The user was informed of his error, but continued anyway. -- Cyrius|✎ 04:32, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, I see that. Ack. -- Infrogmation 04:36, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I recently came across a reference to the idea that jazzbo was a variation on chasse beau and that the word jazz began there. This was a new one to me, but apparently some of our sister wikipediae agree, as you can see in this Google search http://www.google.com/search?q=jazz+chasse+beau&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 You have gone further into this jazz etymology than I have, so I am tossing this over to you for consideration. It would explain the jass spelling, for one thing. Supposedly a chasse beau is a dashing character who drives away the regular boyfriend with his excess charm. Regards, Ortolan88 05:02, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Not sure what you meant to do at Cajun, but you changed guingambó and filé to guingamb�" and fil�, which can't be right. I don't know what is right, so I'm dropping you a note rather than edit it myself. Is it by any chance guingambò and filè? -- Jmabel 18:59, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)

Ack, I was using a browser that I just noticed had been set to Unicode rather than ascii, and was for some reason automatically switching some characters without my touching them. I guess I need to double check my other recent edits to see if that happened to anything else I've edited. Thanks for pointing that out. -- Infrogmation 19:04, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Where do you believe the text you removed from Zek was copied from? I just tried googling a few phrases from it, and I couldn't find anything besides Wikipedia. ~leif 23:20, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Look at the history of Wikipedia:Copyright problems (I removed the explanation after removing or reverting the listed problems). A bunch of User:EDGE posts had problems, many, including Zek, were text copy & pasted from the memory-alpha site linked, which apparently has a licence incompatable with Wikipedia's. -- Infrogmation 23:47, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Ah, I hadn't followed that link to the memory alpha wiki... It's unfortunate that their license is incompatible with the GFDL! ~leif

Thank you for protecting Ron Paul, how do we resolve this when he won't negotiate, just imposes unilateral changes. Reithy 19:27, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)

That is a problem, but a revert war is certainly not the way to deal with it. Please do not make a series of multiple reverts. I would be within policy giving you (along with a couple of others) a temporary edit block for that. If there is a next time I might; it has nothing to do with whose version is "better". If someone seems to be in the habit of making what you see as repeated bad edits, and will not discuss them, bring the matter to the attention of others. See also: Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 19:34, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I noticed that you told User:DIUZOMA that we don't accept copyrighted material. That should have been copyright infringing material. Copyrighted materials, particularly GFDL works, are often fine. Jamesday 21:04, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Yes, you are quite correct and I was aware of that, but worded my note to that user in a sloppy manner. Thank you for the clarification. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 21:06, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hmm, You probly want to tell Reithy the same thing about edit summaries: with his (you know the joke about how Roppongi is good to visit when you have time to kill...lol) [[1]] edit summary too. Also, That edit summary was really in a revert war... It gets kinda trite writing the excat same thing rever over and over again. Thanks Chuck F 21:36, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I hope that BOTH of you will please take time to familiarize yourself with policies, work with more respect and willingness to discuss differences, and refrain from edit wars. -- Infrogmation 21:40, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Do you think it's time to unprotect the surrealism article? If not, can you suggest a course of action to resolve the problems there? ~leif ☺ _HELO 04:58, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Okay, I'll give unprotecting it a try. I hope it goes better this time and I don't have to slap a block on any multiple reverters. -- Infrogmation 14:43, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hello. I just noticed you doing some housecleaning at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Would you be willing to look at a specific entry for me? On 13 OCT 04 I marked Open University Malaysia as copyvio. Tonight I had a message waiting for me asking if the temp re-write could be made the official version, since it had been over a week since it was tagged. Thank you for any assistance you can give. SWAdair | Talk 06:30, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Okay, done. WP:CP has been rather backed up recently. By policy pages are "listed for a minimum of 7 days", but twice that long is not uncommon. cheers, -- Infrogmation 14:34, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Musicians name removed because they did not record for the label as leader or siseman. Booker Little removed because someone had obviously confused him with Booker Ervin. (comment by User:Philip Cross)

Thanks for the explanation. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 15:05, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I got the image off a fan site (don't remember which one) where there was no copyright so I assumed it was public domain. Could we use it as "fair use" or perhaps add a cutline under the image giving a credit?AndyL 01:24, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Actually, I think I might have gotten it off of IMDB, and since there was no citation... Anyway, perhaps you can contact art.com and ask them for permission to use it?AndyL 01:26, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

An arguement for "fair use" might be made I guess, but I think either determining the status of the image we have now and getting permission if we can, or alternatively getting an image we could use under GFDL or PD if possible would be better. -- Infrogmation 18:09, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi Carlos, thanks for your welcoming message. As you can no doubt tell I'm a newbie Wikipedian, and I appreciate being welcomed into the community by someone with as much experience as yourself. As you’ve discovered, I’ve chosen as my first task to help de-stigmatise bipolar disorder by alerting readers to notable people for whom the condition was at least as much a blessing as a curse. The Category mechanism seems like an appropriate way to do this. So I’d like to ask why you reverted my edits re: Buzz Aldrin and William Blake. Warm regards, User:Dalinian

I'll reply on your talk page. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 18:09, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for your helpful comments. These articles are in my own words, and although I clearly have used a number of sources, I feel confident that there are no copright problems. My later article on The Death of Klinghoffer has given me a headache, though !! All good wishes.............Roy Lehrle

Again, tahnks for helping a newbie :)

See you round!

• Next newer archive: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive6
• Next older archive: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive4
• Current talk: User talk:Infrogmation