User talk:Holly Cheng/Archive8

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Announcement

Announcement
The "Help name my baby" Poll has closed :). Greta Annette was born 12/12/06. She weighs 6lbs 14oz and is 19inches long. Mother and baby are both doing fine. Thanks for all the suggestions!

To keep this slightly Wikipedia related I have started Adopt a State, so adopt your state article today!

Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline

Hi. I'm posting this on your talk page because I have noticed that you are often active in one or more aspects of our image use and/or image deletion processes.

I would like to propose

Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline as a guideline to detail the necessary components of a "non-free image use", or "fair use", rationale. At present, it's kindof a moving target. Some image description pages have a detailed, bulleted rationale, while others have a one sentence "this picture identifies the subject". Patroling Category:All images with no fair use rationale
, I've seen image pages that explicitly have something of a rationale that have been nominated for a speedy.

This is not an attempt to change or influence the image use policy in any way - and I would like to steer it away from becoming a rehash of the arguments over recent changes to the fair use policy. The only purpose of this guideline is to assist users who upload fair use images in correctly and adequately documenting what they feel to be the rationale for using the images.

So I would like for us to formalize what is required. I have also created

Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline and the associated talk page to give your thoughts and ideas. Thank you. BigDT 19:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

Image:Omarion-O-AlbumCover.jpg

Images such as

WP:FU requires that fair-use images such as this one have a detailed rationale. --Yamla 00:18, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

Firstly, {{
chat} 00:23, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply
]
It used to be the case that the no-rationale tag was only for fairuse or Non-free fair use in but check the template's discussion page. This is specifically no longer the case. --Yamla 00:57, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. I see what you mean, but it's still ambiguous, because it specifically refers to a "generic fair use template" and only {{
chat} 00:59, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

A change in the Dec 19 POTD

Since you are the main contributor for selecting and maintaining the POTD, you may be interested in

WP:AN#WP:POTD can be speedied?, which ultimately led to this edit. The question left unanswered is what to do now with the Dec 20 POTD. Regards. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:31, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

California State Normal School

As per your suggestion, I have completed my revisions of the California State Normal School article here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Michaelch7/California_State_Normal_School and hereby submit it for inclusion as part of the Wikipedia Project California. This article is the result of many hours of painstaking research into California State Normal School and CSU history. It contains unique content, including text and images, that is available nowhere else, including in any other Wikipedia article. Also, once the article is reinstated, I plan to add even more detail. I hope this important part of California educational history will not be lost. Regards, Michaelch7 December 19, 2006

Hi Howcheng, any update on this article? Thanks, Michaelch7 December 28, 2006
Sorry, vacation and all. After a quick glance, it looks pretty decent. I will move it to the right location.
chat} 07:36, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

Thanks very much. Can we get a link from the Wikipedia Project California page? If so, do you have to do it, or can I? Happy New Year. Michaelch7 December 31, 2006

You can do it yourself, but I don't really see an appropriate location for that article link. If it's publicity you're looking for, I'd suggest writing something up for
chat} 01:43, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

da Vinci Barnstar Award

Moved to user page.

Wording in a POTD

I was just reading the Picture of the day on January 10, 2007 POTD, the riffle shuffle which I nominated, and realised the wording in the opening line is quite odd as it seems the section after the comma should've come after the ohrase "riffle shuffle" rather than after poker. However I am unsure whether general users are allowed to edit POTD templates and have instead brought it here to ask for your opinion rather than making the change. –– Lid(Talk) 16:00, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The POTD stuff is a wiki, just like everything else, so if you see an error, please feel free to fix it. Thanks!
chat} 21:07, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

Merry Christmas

Darwinek wishes you a Merry Christmas!

Hi Howard! I just want to say Merry Christmas to you! Have a nice holiday time. - Darwinek 10:58, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of the day

talk | 15:52, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

Agreed. Can you tell anyone else working on POTD. For full details of the vandalism, see the discussion here. Thanks. Carcharoth 16:47, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Change to Common.css

Per

More specific instructions can be found on the Persondata page. --ShakingSpirittalk on behalf of Kaldari 01:13, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

Merry Christmas!

Karla Faye Tucker

Thank you Howcheng. You are awesome! Fighting for Justice 21:34, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Year

Main Page Vandalism

Looks like someone already took care of it.
chat} 00:16, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cat Island (Mississippi)

There's a picture right in the article. Are you telling me it doesn't look like a catamaran?
chat} 18:40, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Statue

Yes, because it shows the statue. If you just cropped it so that you see the impact of the shrapnel, there's no fair use claim necessary at all.
chat} 07:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Thanks!

File:Exquisite-gphoto.png
 Thanks for updating the POTD template on my user page! Happy editing! SD31415 (SIGN HERE) 23:33, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago FPHello,

My picture of the Chicago Skyline was chosen to be a featured picture 2 months ago. When will it be featured? Is there anything that needs to be done for it? Writting a good Caption?

Buphoff 01:12, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see... the last one I created was February 10, 2007, with the 1895 train wreck picture. Yours is 14 photos behind that, but it will probably be about 3 weeks after that (so roughly March 2-3) because we only run 5 new ones/week with two repeats.
chat} 06:36, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

FPC stuff

I know - the basic problem is instruction creep. You can find essays on the problems of instruction creep elsewhere on Wikipedia. It used to be that many aspects of Wikipedia (most especially ratios required for consensus) were not written down too explicitly. This is because it is generally helpful if guidelines are interpreted with a bit of common sense. It is also seldom the case that a list of explicit instructions manages to correctly address every future scenario. In principle inappropriate guidelines can be changed, but its typically easier to introduce new untested guidelines than remove existing inappropriate ones.
A few years back, I spent a fair amount of effort trying to steer opinion and attitudes on FPC. As I saw it, the basic problem was that too many participants just voted yay or nay on a picture based on how pretty it looked with occaisional objections based on technical grounds. But this consistently failed diagrams and also failed to expand the range of subjects covered or broaden the number of contributors. In particular I found it almost impossible to get editors to look at how an image is used in an article. I noticed issues, such as many of Fir0002's pictures, that although visually excellent were often tacked on to an article that was something of a stub - sometimes they weren't attached to an article at all (which was a bit of headache when they came up for POTD), but no FPC voters had noticed. There is no reason why Fir0002 should be excellent at taking photos and good at writing articles - in fact you might expect that few photographers would also be good writers. And that shouldn't be a problem since Wikipedia is a collaboration between thousands of editors with different tallents. This was part of the impetuous behind setting up Picture Peer Review, to give a place to attract writers to work on articles with good illustrations (I'm not sure it has totally worked). Either way, I don't think it has had any effect on getting FPC voters to take the time to look at how an image is used in an article.
Another significant problem area is to encourage more professional photographers to contribute images to Wikipedia. Quite a large number of articles have external links to photographer's websites where they have some images that illustrate the subject. These are all basically spam. Few editors remove them though - and if you do, you can expect to face some critism, since most editors feel that it is useful to readers to have a link to a good range of photos on the subject. Now the incessant pressure for larger and larger images on FPC, and in Wikipedia in general, is a serious obstacle. It is difficult, but just about possible, to remove the external link and encourage a professional photographer to contribute a 1024px photo, on the basis that they can include a source link to their website on the image description page. Part of the argument their is that a 1024px photo won't hurt their print sales too much. But at the moment FPC is actively opposed to this sort of approach. I think too many editors forget that the only point in having areas like FPC is to try and improve the illustrations of Wikipedia articles across the board.
Its not just FPC. Many rules and guidelines in Wikipedia have, quite rightly, been revised upwards, but often at a cost. I've had issues with the shift to reject all non-commercial use only images. And a little while back I had an editor place a notice on an
cite
}} template for individual facts had come in. Fine, but where are the other editors who are going to come along and update the article to use the cite template? There doesn't even seem to be enough good editors left to keep on top of vandalism. I like the cite templates and use them in new articles, but I'm not going to go back and update every article I've worked on. I haven't signed up for maintaining Wikipedia to take advantage of each new improvement for the next 20 years.
In truth I'm not really that bothered because I've mostly given up trying. But I've decided to take a more bolshie stance in the hope that it might help more people notice that the problems are real. -- Solipsist 09:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image deletion scriptsHey- my image deletion buttons don't show up any more. I am getting "Invalid argument" on line 568 of http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/wikibits.js any time I click on an image. The line it is failing on, in the function addPortletLink, is:

node.insertBefore( item, nextnode );

When I use Visual Studio to debug, it says that nextnode is undefined and item's id is nom-for-del. It looks like the call to addPortletLink is missing a parameter, but I didn't want to just go mucking around in your script blindly to try and fix it. I recently became an admin, so I don't know if that has anything to do with it. Do I get a different set of default javascript files or something?

Thanks. --BigDT 17:25, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh -- that's probably related to changes introduced by
chat} 17:29, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
I left a message with Ilmari to let him know about the bug. However, it works fine in Firefox, so might I suggest you switch browsers? :)
chat} 18:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
LOL ... well ... I've switched temporarilly for another problem. When I load large pages like DRV or ANI, IE is taking 99% of my CPU and just grinding to a halt. This is brand new ... is it possible that some script changes have messed something up? I guess if nobody else is yelling loudly, it could be just me. My work computer is slow (1.6) and usually when I'm on here, something is compiling, so that probably isn't doing me any favors ... but still, something isn't right somewhere. --BigDT 19:12, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And I thought it was just me! I am finding loading my watchlist the most cumbersome and grinding. Sorry I just jumped in here, but it was bugging me and was considering posting to the village pump.--Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 21:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mark name.png

Done.
chat} 00:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
All finished. Thank you. Iamunknown 01:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Erg

Well, I was going off the list of ergs from the
chat} 19:18, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you note from User:Waialeale

Hi Howcheng, Thanks for writing me that letter on my talk page. I think it was very nice of you. Waialeale 23:40, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned image


problem with monobook.js fileI notieced your username toward the bottom of the code, and thought maybe you could fix the template - or direct it to whomever would be the correct person.

I do cleanup work at AfD, and the following users come up in the AfD debates - not yet sorted. They all have the same template in their monobook:

  • User:Bbatsell/monobook.js
  • User:Circeus/monobook.js
  • User:Mikm/monobook.js
  • User:Flyingtoaster1337

Evidently there's something that isn't resolving correctly - I'm not familiar enough with this to fix it, hoping you're able to do so, and let the creator know about the problem!

Thanks -

SkierRMH 05:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Can you give an example of what the problem is? Thanks.
chat} 06:25, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen timeline

Well, I think it can be cleaned up for one thing. Besides, the switch to AFD instead of PROD is not just for the sake of "process". PROD is for uncontested deletions -- articles that are pretty much guaranteed to get deleted so that AFD doesn't get clogged. I'm not convinced that this one falls into that category. Thus, the push to go AFD instead.
chat} 16:42, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
If you're actually contesting the deletion, then I have no objection to your removing the PROD tag. The idea that someone might contest the deletion is not a good reason to delete a PROD, in my opinion. But whatever--it's in AFD now. Nareek 17:11, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Neil Morris (Neilm)

I didn't know him. I only saw the information on his talk page and then put the notice on his user page. I did ask
chat} 21:02, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks.--Alabamaboy 00:52, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shorter warning template

Sorry for the delay in responding. This sounds like a great idea. I can pretty easily make the script do this. Let me know when you short versions of all the warning templates. Thanks.
chat} 00:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks! I'm glad you think it's useful. After thinking about it a bit, I figured I should limit the short templates for the warnings likeliest to be applied regarding images that were uploaded in good faith by experienced users in the first place. I've done {{
Chick Bowen 00:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
Those two are the same thing so I just redirect {image fairuse rationale} to {missing rationale}. Also, I was thinking that it would be best if the short versions had the exact same name as their longer counterparts, just with "short" appended at the end (makes it easier to program).
chat} 01:07, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
Makes sense--done.
Chick Bowen 01:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Amsterdam pictureThe picture is fantastic! Just one comment: Amsterdam is not the capital of The Netherlands, as stated on the Wikipedia page. Its the Hague. Thanks! —The preceding
unsigned comment was added by 65.219.216.10 (talk) 16:01, 25 January 2007 (UTC).[reply
]

From The Hague:
The Hague is the actual seat of government, but, somewhat anomalously, not the official capital of the Netherlands, a role set aside by the Dutch constitution for Amsterdam.
So yes, Amsterdam is the capital of the Netherlands.
chat} 21:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Jerome Barber

Image:Cracker Jack.jpg

Yes, I'm serious. It may sound trivial to you, but the one that's on the article right now is a copyright violation. There's no reason we have to use their copyrighted image when we can create one of our own. That's just being lazy.
chat} 16:51, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
So it's OK for me to take a picture of a Cracker Jack bag and post it here, and that would not be a copyright violation?
Wahkeenah 18:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
Yes, assuming you released it under a free license. I did that for
chat} 21:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
Coca-Cola owns their trademark, and you copied it. Seems to me like you're in violation.
Wahkeenah 01:30, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
That would be true if I used the Coca-Cola logo on my own soda, or I added it to another product in order to imply that Coca-Cola made/endorsed that product -- that would be a trademark violation. As it is, that picture simply shows a can of Coca-Cola C2 that was produced by the Coca-Cola company. I own the rights to the image itself, but not the logo which is depicted in the picture. Please see
chat} 02:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
Meanwhile, I once had someone try to tell me that this photo, which I took, was a copyright violation, probably due to the presence of a trademark:
Wahkeenah
03:22, 30 January 2007 (UTC) Image:Cracker Jack bag.JPG[reply]

Excellent. I put it in the article for you.
chat} 04:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Re: Deleted informationGranted, a lot of that informatoin is factual, however, I doubt that it is necessary. In the name of neurality, to say that Costello is a "powerful" performer needs to be cited, and if that was indeed what was said, we should be able to source such a quote. Please discuss. Nervousbreakdance 04:16, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion moved to Talk:My Aim Is True.

President and feather

Welsh Mythology

Thanks. Unfortunately I can't locate any "Move" tab, and I have had to move the text of "Dylan Eil Ton" to "Dylan Eil Don" by cutting and pasting again. ----Sanddef

Template:GFDL-presumed

"Considering that GFDL is the default licensing". Take a look at the upload page. it hasn't said that for a long time but feel free to raise the issue at
Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags.Geni 23:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Colorado Rapids --> Arsenal Colorado FCThe new website www.arsenalcoloradofc.com briefly went live today. For weeks the Rapids hasve said to expect a big change 2/01/2007. That is totday. A news conference has been called for tomorrow to make the change official.

Just trying to save someone some work. If you want to save the work I did to update the MLS and Rapids pages tomorrow, please feel free too. I'm done. —The preceding

unsigned comment was added by Qwestarsenal (talk • contribs) 01:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC).[reply
]

Well, no announcement today. I've been checking that web site periodically as well, but it hasn't come online either. We'll just have to wait until the announcement is actually made before making any changes here.
chat} 03:00, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

DuHauron POTD

Tottenham Hotspur
I hope you're monitoring this page since you removed the sprotect! Get rdy to see all the vandalism come back!! Regards Govvy 10:58, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's on my watchlist (no changes since I unprotected it). Seriously, two months sprotected for the Spurs article is kind of ridiculous. The articles for the other top teams in the league don't have any protection and we deal with vandalism fine on them.
chat} 16:59, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All the other top clubs are protected, you said in my talk, 10x/day for several days that exactly what Spurs got down to with vandalism. It was a serious problem and probably will be again since you removed it. Govvy 19:07, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

WTF? I have a feeling the protection is being applied a lot more liberally than it used to.
chat} 19:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Shame I know, just a lot of people have predigest against a lot of things. I am sure most of these vandals are under a certain age! and I'll bet if you asked them all "What is the length of the longest side of an isosceles triangle?" I'd bet they wouldn't know!! Govvy 00:34, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

POTDHi Joaquim,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Using the caliper new en.gif is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on March 10, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-03-10. howcheng {chat} 17:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Howcheng. I did try to improve the explanation, but the resulting English might still need a review. Alvesgaspar 18:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fact

When I made this edit that category had been deleted (notice the timestamps), so it only made sense to not have the category in the template.
chat} 16:55, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Featured picture promotion and barnstar thanks
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Edgar Allan Poe 2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thanks! KFP (talk | contribs) 22:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
...And thank you for the barnstar as well! :) --KFP (talk | contribs) 22:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image licensing

You're right, a Creative Commons declaration is irrevocable. However, these weren't licensed CC-BY, but {{
chat} 04:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
Oh darn it. What did Dr31 stipulate in the free use provided template? Hbdragon88 04:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
While we're on this topic of images, could you restore [1]? I believe it contains deletion discussion that isn't logged elsewhere, so the db-talk criteria doesn't apply. I had tagged it when I wasn't aware of this. Hbdragon88 04:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done.
chat} 17:54, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Sahara satellite image

Done.
chat} 17:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

POTD

Dear,Howcheng

U.S. Roads Newsletter Issue #1

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter

Volume 1, Issue 1
10 February 2007
 About the Newsletter
Departments: Features:
Project News
Notability of state highways is challenged
Important deletion debates
Featured subproject
Featured member
From the editor
Archives  |  Newsroom  
WP:USRD/N
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 20:35, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lilac chaser
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Lilac-Chaser.gif, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thanks! KFP (talk | contribs) 21:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:LaSalle2.jpg)Thanks for uploading
our fair use policy
).

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. This is an automated message from BJBot 07:08, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Statue again

No, freedom of panorama in the U.S. does not apply to statues -- only buildings. Stupid, I know, but that's the law. This image needs two license tags: one for the image itself and {{
chat} 17:35, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks. I thought it might be covered under copyright, so I just wanted to ask to make sure. This is probably the most pervading image problem to sort out - most people assume that it's free. It's totally non-intuitive. I just fixed up Image:McNair memorial 1313.JPG, for instance. Hbdragon88 07:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Today's FP, 'Zabriskie Point'Howcheng,

Apologies for failing to respond sooner to the notice that you left on my talk page. I was logged out of Wikipedia for some time, neglected to sign back in and hence didn't receive the 'new changes' notice until today. A belated thank you for letting me know that the photo I nominated for FP would be hitting the front page today - it made for a lovely surprise when I saw it! Also, sorry that my inability to log back in meant that I couldn't help edit the caption, but frankly I'd have done a rubbish job anyway!

Kind regards, CountdownCrispy ( ? 14:49, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tartan ribbon POTD

USRD Newsletter - Issue 2

File:New Jersey blank.svg

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter

Volume 1, Issue 2
24 February 2007
 About the Newsletter
Departments: Features:
Project News
Notability of state highways is upheld
Deletion debates
Kansas Turnpike is now a Good Article
Featured subproject
U.S. Roads IRC channel created
Featured member
Infoboxes and Navigation subproject started
From the editors
Archives  |  Newsroom  
WP:USRD/NEWS
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 20:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanxs!Thank you for the heads up regarding the POTD appearance. The caption looks perfect to me! =)

Mr. Cheese Jumping cheese Cont@ct 07:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFPP - template

Oh, I'd forgotten about that ... it's been a while since I've done those. Will be sure to keep in mind for the future. Thanks for the reminder.
chat} 16:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Hello

Ha...now I'm doubly sorry. Majorly already handled my request. Yarly! Thanks again for your patience. Mael-Num 20:47, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

I only wander into DYK every once in a while, so I'll decline to do that for now. But thanks.
chat} 00:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

DYK

Survey Invitation

FYI - on DYK next update change

List of football (soccer) players with 100 or more caps

Oh, I'm not worried. I'm an admin who has dealt a lot with copyright issues. I used to work on
chat} 03:44, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Very good. --ChaChaFut 03:56, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

WikiProject National Register of Historic Places

I guess I can add myself, even though I don't expect to be a major participant. I just like the easy copy-paste jobs I can do from the NPS web site (yay for public domain U.S. federal government pages!).
chat} 17:39, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Brian Cook

I'm rouge, not rogue. There's a difference. :P
chat} 19:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Point taken, but I still don't see why you defend this joker. He's no good. Are you his agent or something?

This is Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia, not Wikipedia, the web site where we bash on people we don't like. If you don't like Brian Cook, bitch about him all you want on your own blog, not here.
chat} 23:55, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

But I don't even have my own blog how else can I spread my 'pinions. I think that people would want to know that hes not a very well liked person I'm not the only one who doesnt like how he acts.

Blogger is free. Have at it.
chat} 00:09, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

What are you on all day protecting the precious Brian Cook article? God forbid some negative publicity about this guy get out. Why don't you get a job?

There's a policy:
chat} 20:28, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Pictures I uploaded

Thank you for the DYK

New NRHP Collaboration Division

USRD
Newsletter - Issue 3

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter

Volume 1, Issue 3
10 March 2007
 About the Newsletter
Departments: Features:
Project news
Inactivity?
Deletion debates
Article Improvement Drive
Featured subproject
Good and Featured Articles
Featured member
From the editors
Archives  |  Newsroom  
WP:USRD/NEWS
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

Active user verification

DYK

Updated DYK query On
10 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jose Maria Alviso Adobe, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page
.

--Carabinieri

DYK

Updated DYK query On
Hanna-Honeycomb House, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page
.

--ALoan (Talk) 19:49, 12 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Again?

"... Eventually I managed to get most of these biographies reinstated by waiting several months and then trying again, when Louis Blair was not looking. ..." - Sam Sloan (Mon Mar 12, 2007 6:12 pm)

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.chess.politics/browse_frm/thread/7d8fd30b87dcbe95?scoring=d&hl=en

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration&oldid=68693060#Sam_Sloan

(This is posted here by Louis Blair (March 13, 2007))

Re:Unitary Plan Wind TunnelHi Dear I was putting clean tag on this page Mangrio.Sorry I did not notice it, that at same time clean-up tag appeared on this article (Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel). I removed tag. Khalidkhoso 21:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CHICOTW

Flag of Chicago
Chicago Collaboration of the Week
Flag of Chicago
Last week you helped edit the Chicago COTW, but did not vote. Thank you for your help! Your input in future selections would also be appreciated. This week Burnham Park (Chicago) has been chosen. Please help improve it towards the quality level of a Wikipedia featured article. See the To Do List to suggest a change or to see an open tasks list.
Flag of Chicago
Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago
Flag of Chicago

bio
) 00:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Downtown Historic District (San Jose, California) DYK hook

It's actually a summary... they're listed in the body of the article, but I'll put it in the article.
chat} 02:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
Updated DYK query On
14 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Downtown Historic District (San Jose, California), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page
.

--Mgm|(talk) 09:54, 14 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Copyright ViolationHello, and
welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Ramona Street Architectural District, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/travel/santaclara/ram.htm, and therefore a copyright violation
. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following: