Misplaced Pages

User talk:Paul venter: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 11:22, 1 April 2007 editKittybrewster (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers45,052 edits →Size of pictures← Previous edit Revision as of 13:39, 1 April 2007 edit undoPaul venter (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users21,005 edits ←Blanked the pageNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
{{signpost-subscription}}
{{pic of the day}}

'''Welcome!'''

Hello, {{PAGENAME}}, and ] to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on my talk page, or place <code>{&#123;helpme}}</code> on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!&nbsp; --] 14:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

== CMB ==

Hi Paul,

Just wanted to let you know now that the question has been archived that I haven't forgotten our discussion, I'd just got to the point where I wanted to refresh my memory of the stuff involved before I got myself in any deeper. I will get back to you when I've managed to find a decent chunk of uninterrupted time to really concentrate on it and get it straight in my own head before trying to explain it to you. Probably best if we carry on on talk pages, though, if that's OK with you? --] 15:55, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Bth (ith, jth, kth?)

The world around us has waited for a few billion years for us to stumble on its mechanisms - a few weeks more will make no difference. However, I'm getting close to my threescore and ten.... never know when one's going to pop off! Thanks for the time and effort - I'm genuinely appreciative. --] 17:56, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

== {{tl|helpme}} ==
Hi Paul venter, you put the {{tl|helpme}} template on your talk page. How may I help you? When you answer, please put {{tl|helpme}} after the question again so that we know when to look again. - ]]] 14:30, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

hi tangotango
thx for coming to the rescue - i have uploaded an image of Canary Pine bark and would like to place it on the Canary Pine page.....how do i go about it.

:Hi, simply put <nowiki>]</nowiki> on the page. For example, if the image was called CanaryPine.jpg, type <nowiki>]</nowiki>. The <nowiki>]</nowiki>, for example. There are many other features that are documented at ] and ]. Hope this helps! Cheers, ]]] 15:20, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

== ] ==

Hello, I reverted your edits to ] because we are using the spelling "Pinyon" on Misplaced Pages articles. Thanks, and happy editing! ''''']''''' ] 22:51, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

== {{tl|helpme}} ==

An old article ] had the surmame misspelt. I copied the article to a new heading under ]. After checking that the old article had no links, I hoped that one could delete or redirect it. How does one go about it? --] 06:48, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

:Actually the way to move articles is with the "move" button (to the right of the "history" button), as discussed at ]. We move articles instead of copy and pasting so the history of the article (who wrote it etc) remains with the article. I have fixed up the move. ] now exists as a redirect to the article (when you move a page, it automatically creates the redirect, which is very handy).--] 07:37, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Thx for helping - I discovered the move feature after I'd created the new page - too late!! --] 07:56, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

==License tagging for Image:Pincan21a.jpg==
Thanks for uploading ]. Misplaced Pages gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Misplaced Pages, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an ] applied to the ] 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 ]. 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 ]. 14:07, 22 April 2006 (UTC)


==Helpme==
Image:Drakensburgmountains.jpg should be renamed Drakensberg.jpg . "burg" means town in Afrikaans - "berg" is the correct spelling and means "mountain". The image illustrates the article ] and the suffix "-mountains" is a repetition of "berg" . How does one correct this? --] 21:51, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

:There isn't an easy way. Since the image is on the commons you would need to go to the commons, save the image to your hard disk then upload it under the correct name. Then get someone at commons to delete the old image. Also, you would need to change every article (possibly in other languages) that uses the image. Keep in mind that the article title doesn't need to be accurate, it's just a file name.--] 14:45, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I uploaded an image called Magaliesberg01.jpg, but the article ] doesn't show the thumbnail!!!??? What stupid thing have I done (or not done)? Thx --] 19:27, 4 May 2006 (UTC) ((helpme))
==License tagging for Image:MAGALIES.JPG==
Thanks for uploading ]. Misplaced Pages gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Misplaced Pages, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an ] applied to the ] 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 ]. 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 ]. 19:08, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

== Image:Drakensberg.jpg listed for deletion ==

<div style="padding:5px; background-color:#E1F1DE"> An image or media file that you uploaded, ], has been listed at ]. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Idw --></div> —] (]) 01:31, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

== Your correction to ] ==

Thank you for pointing out an important error in ]. ] 19:08, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

== ] ==

OK, I've done most of them. "]" and "]" are still unclear however... Also, some the common names correspond to more than one species, so for these I chose the most common reference. --] 12:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

==''Swietenia mahagoni''==
Hi Paul - ''Swietenia mahagoni'' is the correct spelling (I know it's not what one might expect, but it is the spelling used in the original scientific description) - ] 00:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
:Thanks for the note; IPNI actually list all the variant spellings without favouring or rejecting any; looking through their ''Swietenia'' , the basionym is ''Cedrela mahagoni'' L. ; it was transferred to ''Swietenia'' by Jacquin in 1760, and as afr as I can tell from the IPNI listings, that remains the correct name in ''Swietenia''; the other spellings are all later (Lamarck on the early 1800s, and de Candolle a little later) and thus synonyms under the ICBN. The also use ''Swietenia mahagoni'', and they are generally very reliable in their nomenclature. I can't find any info to suggest there's been a formal proposal to change the spelling - ] 12:46, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

==Your edit to ]==
Your recent edit to ] () was reverted by an '''automated bot''' that attempts to recognize and repair ] to Misplaced Pages articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. ''']''' for '''frequently asked questions''' about the bot and this warning. // ] 17:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
:Umm, under the GFDL you can't pull stuff as other people have edited it. I've put it back to the image less one and sent a cpl emails til I can figure out what happened -- ] 22:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

== Images ==
In almost every case, images taken from websites or other areas on the net are not qualifing as "fair-use"..there are exceptions, but at this time, I believe that Misplaced Pages is going to do all it can to reduce the number of fair use images in this website to protect the ] license we operate under. When you go the upload page...you'll see a red box with the following:
*Images found on websites or on an image search engine should not be uploaded to Misplaced Pages.
(For exceptions, see Misplaced Pages:Fair use and Misplaced Pages:Free image resources.)

Click on the Misplaced Pages:Fair use and the Misplaced Pages:Free image resources blue links to learn more about we can and cannot upload into the website. The policies on these matters are not designed to discourage people from not editing but only to ensure we don't post copyrighted material, which keeps the chances of the website being sued minimized. Thanks.--] 08:23, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

If you have the permission to use the images and it comes from the person or entity that holds the copyrights, then you must demonstrate that on the upload page of the images.--] 11:39, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Has the copyright holder released the images into the '''public domain''' or allowed them to be used as '''free use'''? If the email you have says this and they understand this, then reupload the images with a copy and paste of the email or a copy and paste of a scanned letter demostrating that he/she has done this...then select the proper license from the license drop down tag...either "Attribution share alike 2.5" or "Attribution 2.5" I believe and upload the images. I never upload any images unless they are completely within the public domain or ones I have taken myself...so I don't know if I can direct you any better than this...let me know where the images are by linking me to the upload pages...or I'll just watch your edits and see how you do and try to make the corrections. I would have to say that the copyright issues regarding images is one of the most complicated things the regular editor will deal with, but once you figure it out, it starts to come naturally.--] 15:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

The image rendering software for wikipedia is messed up right now...make sure you add a scan of either the mail of the letter you recieved releasing the images as free use or into the public domain to the licensing section and/or a a note to check the discussion page of the image upload to see the notification of release.--] 16:06, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

== Comments in Big Bang Article ==

Paul, on the Big Bang talk page you wrote that, "The history of science revolves around the contributions of dedicated and brilliant amateurs.(Perhaps this is material for an article that might instil some hubris in arrogant professional scientists). My view of a scientist is perhaps slightly broader than that he should have some paper qualification certifying his expertise in some narrow field. As for experience, a lot of professional scientists seem to confuse that with growing older, or with how many trivial papers they have published in a suitably prestigious journal. I have found throughout my life, that the true scientist is neither arrogant nor patronising, that he is unstinting in giving of his time, and that his curiosity about the world around him, knows no bounds. These are the people who stand out from the common crowd. Science is shamed by such vainglorious strutting."

Aside from your use of the word hubris as an antonym for arrogance (when it in fact is a synonym of it), I completely agree with the substance of your statement. Which is why - rather than strutting around in life talking about how great science is and lording it over other people - I have instead devoted myself to a tireless effort of public education, outreach, public lectures, tours of research facilities, volunteering at elementary schools, high schools, and colleges, tutuoring, collaborating with people from all over the world, and pushing myself to be a life-long learner, taking every difficult class I can and reading books for which there are no classes. In my enthusiasm for sharing this knowledge (and more to the point of improving the quality of articles here on Misplaced Pages), it may come across as hubris to you but you are honestly the first person who has mentioned something like that to me. And while your statements above ring true for science as a philosophy, that "amateurs" have been the backbone of scientific progress it is important to note that the amateurs you speak of have been individuals who have dedicated their lives and passion to studying those fields and support fields like physics and mathematics. They may have been amateurs but they also had aptitude. This category of lifelong passion is the one into which I fall, and in fact only recently did I finish my graduate degree and become, formally, a scientist. I have however been a scientist long before I got a degree, and while the degree doesn't make a scientist for sure the aptitude does and must. You cannot pick a person at random off the street and find that they have an aptitude for differential equations or the operation of x-ray spectrometers, or even basic calculus 101 for that matter. So when an individual with aptitude offers her or his expertise, it would be naive to call that hubris, especially when there is so much confusion and misconception on so many topics wihtin the sciences as fundamental as the second law of thermodynamics, basic vector algebra, and so on. So please don't take my comments on the Big Bang talk page as a personal slight against you. My desire, as always, is to hold Wiki articles to the highest standards and to share knowledge with others on topics for which many have opinions but few spend their lives devoted to the exploration of. My experience in the fields of astrophysics and engineering make me an asset to that end, not an arrogant liability. (please forgive all the prepositions) Regards, ] 22:32, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

:Astrobayes, quite right about hubris - I should parse my writing before hitting SAVE. Competence and aptitude, I am afraid, are not sufficient qualities to vouchsafe a scientist. In all my years of working with and in the scientific community, I have come to realise that there are vapid people sheltering behind the protective mantle of PhD's and the security of tenure. These same people are regarded as competent in their field. What they lack is quite simply curiosity about any other areas of life. To me, this curiosity is the only redeeming quality that we have and supersedes altruism, charity, love and of course faith and hope. I could happily share a desert isle with Adolf Hitler or Gengis Khan, because I think they would be truly interesting people and not the thorough villains which society has brainwashed us into believing. I digress....

:To return, one of the necessary marks of the scientist (to my mind, obviously) is a curiosity about all things, and this desire to know can crop up in the most unexpected places. I have taught the basics of science to all sorts of people, and once in a while that golden moment arrives when you can sense the excitement and awe of someone's understanding a difficult concept for the first time - these occasions are precious. Somewhere in Misplaced Pages I wrote some rules for volunteers working on the reference desk to bear in mind before dismissing a question as frivolous or idiotic. Part of it was a reminder that potential scientists can come from the most unpromising backgrounds and that the treatment they receive, can douse the spark or turn it into a raging fire. Therefor, watch out for the facile use of labels like AMATEUR or INCOMPETENT, because they very easily turn into blinkers that can blind one to the truth.
To life!!! ] 12:09, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

::Paul, you and I apparently share the same passion for life and curiosity about Nature. We might both agree with Einstein, who said "the great mystery of the Universe is its comprehensibility." I look forward to contributing to some of the same articles with you here on Wiki in the future, as we both have the same goal. And again, if what I stated came across as hubris, please accept my apologies. I cannot mask my enthusiasm to share my experiences working in the field of astrophysics and physics in general, but indeed you're right that it bears considering the backgrounds and sensibilities of others. Any can have passion about the natural world, and a little patience goes a long way. I must admit that I have grown frustrated over the years with some of my students not caring about science and math, and not only registering for the course ("to get the credit") but also then arguing about the subject material or sleeping through a discussion. I didn't intend for that frustration to translate over to my contributions and comments in Wiki. ...something for me to think about. Take care, and may the (],],],]) be with you! Cheers, ] 18:24, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

== Your contributions to ] ==

When you make edits like this , you leave me no choice but to personally remind you of such policies as ], ], and ]. Please read and familiarise yourself with these policies as well as the ] before participating further in this discussion.--''']]''' 17:08, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Dear Chris, I suppose one could use words like 'misrepresent', 'prevaricate', 'dissemble' and a dozen other euphemisms. However there is really no more polite or straightforward way of saying it. You provoke reaction by your unbelievably autocratic tactics, and your failure to apologise to your fellow editors for these actions, inclines one to believe that power has gone to your head. Then when your fellow editors respond in outrage, you shelter behind quotes from the Misplaced Pages policy. As I have pointed out to you, your actions might fall within the strict letter of Misplaced Pages rules, but the spirit you display is deplorable and will only serve to alienate other editors. ] 18:23, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

:I just wanted to say that there has been a ]. Since you have been a contributor to the article, I encourage you to add to the debate and to contribute to the article, in the future. ] 05:39, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

==]==
Paul, I saw the list of passengers you added to the Comair article. I suggest that a separate page be added to Misplaced Pages to list the passengers and crew of Comair 5191. Other aircraft crash articles on Misplaced Pages do not include the entire passenger list. I have no intention of editing the article to change or remove the list, but if this were a separate article with a link to it from Comair 5191 then the same thing is accomplished. ] 12:55, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
:Also, please see the ongoing discussion at ] under "Entire victim list". ] 13:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

==Your user page==
Paul, one other thing, I noticed someone has used your User page to write something that ought to be on your talk page. You may want to edit it. Normally your user page should only be editted by you. ] 12:56, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

== ] ==

You are now in violation of the three-revert rule. You shall immediately cease and desist from re-inserting the list of victims on ] or you shall find yourself blocked from editing Misplaced Pages for increasingly long periods of time.--''']]''' 23:15, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I love it when you talk tough!! Have you considered professional help? ] 16:53, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

== User notice: temporary 3RR block ==

<div style="background-color: #f9f9f9; border: 1px solid red; padding: 3px;">
==Regarding reversions made on ] ] to ]==
{| class="user-block"
|| ]
|| You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the ]. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.
|}<!-- Template:3RR5 --> The duration of the is 8 hours. ] 07:34, 11 September 2006 (UTC)</div>

Hello William, I think quite possibly I don't understand the 3 revert rule. The list of passengers which I added to the Comair accident article has been removed by chrislawson repeatedly. I have made what I feel to be a case on the discussion page for including the passenger list in the body of the article - I presume you read the relevant portions. The only reaction I got to my suggestion, was a revert. Now I'm a bit puzzled, so please enlighten me - if I added to the article and crislawson removed the information more than 3 times, is he not the person contravening the 3RR? regards ] 10:52, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

: Were that the case, then yes. But if you look at the edit history, thats not what happened. As I see it, you reverted >3 times in 24h, and no-one else has. Talking about it is good, but doesn't prevent you being blocked ] 11:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

::Umm. Chrislawson is far too canny to be caught like that - he makes use of the services of his sidekicks VxSote, LrdChaos, Peyna and Dblevins2. Have a good day! ] 11:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Please take the time to read the comments by Mfields and Mytwocents on the chris.lawson talk page. I really don't mind being blocked unjustly, but if it were done without your having read the background to this dispute, it would distress me greatly. Cheers ] 11:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

:::Excuse me, but I have also reverted the anti-concensus change for which you got a 3RR block, and I am ''certainly'' nobody's sidekick. Not even ''close''.
:::In fact, this is a textbook example of why the 3RR policy works: If it really were a no-concensus one-on-one battle between you and another editor, then you are absolutely right, both would be guilty of 3RR and blocked accordingly. But that's not the case. Four or five editors have reached concensus, and you refused to accept that concensus.
:::Just because I happen to agree with Chrislawson doesn't make me some kind of lackey or sidekick, and it's offensive to accuse people of that. --] 13:30, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
::::Amen. ] 13:40, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
:::::Really! You happen to agree with lawson all the time; coincidence? I don't think so. If you can't think and act for yourselves and can only function when you're part of a gang, then you have no business in the pages of Misplaced Pages. And certainly if you can't spell '''consensus''', then what are you doing editing? Incidentally, you should look up the meaning of the word - it is used to indicate a trend of thinking and wrongly to denote unanimity. In which sense did you use it? ] 14:13, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
::::::"You happen to agree with lawson all the time," you say?? Please see ], where I accuse Chrislawson of failing to ] because of his handling of another editor's contributions. (Incidentally, you can also see Peyna disagreeing with lawson at the bottom of that same section... "sidekicks" indeed!) I had only two interactions on that Talk page involving lawson, and in one of them I accused him of a serious policy violation! How can I possibly be his lackey?!?
::::::'''I am a 100% independent editor, and it is an ''insult'' to me that you would accuse me of being someone's puppy-dog and agreeing with him or her as a matter of policy.'''
::::::In fact, it turns out that I might agree with you on certain things -- I also believe that Misplaced Pages policies are too restrictive in some cases about what information should be included. I think that the desire to be "enyclopedia-like" is causing WP to jettison valid and useful content.
::::::But you wanna know something? This website is 100% free. No fees, not even ''ads''. Since we're not living in Communist Russia, that means somebody is writing the checks. Money for servers, money for storage space, money for bandwidth... As long as that's the case, I'm going to abide by the policies of the folks in charge. If that means excluding content I think would be useful, so be it. I don't make the rules.
::::::(And yeah, I admit I have a mental block on the spelling of "consensus" -- I do consistently get that word wrong, and believe it or not, I actually appreciate the reminder. My grammar and spelling are leagues beyond the average person, and I damn well know it, so I'm not going to go away with hurt feelings just because I got one word wrong. But you're right, I need to be more careful on that one.) --] 14:54, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
::: I am also offended by that assertion... let's just leave it at that. ] 16:36, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

: In fact, your last edit is another 3RR vio. I advise you to self-revert it, because if anyone asks for you to be blocked for it, you probably will be, and for longer this time ] 11:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

::I believe Paul's ridiculous and unsubstantiated accusations of sockpuppetry against numerous editors are reason enough to extend the block, but if not, I'll make a formal suggestion that his ''sixth'' reversion is ample grounds for extending it without taking his gross violations of ] into account.--''']]''' 00:19, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

:::Chris -- please see ]. I absolutely agree that Paul has made some unjustified accusations, but he has not made any more reversions since I confronted him, and I think we are gradually reaching a point of understanding. As you can see above, I was upset as anyone about his wild finger-pointing, but I think we may have convinced him there is no secret conspiracy here. ''If'' Paul can refrain from anti-consensus reversions in the future, I would actually oppose a block. (However -- and no offense to you, Paul -- I would suggest a one-more-strike-and-you're-out policy here) --] 05:26, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
:::Also note that have been purely good faith. He made some nasty accusations, but I think the issue has been resolved and an extended block is unnecessary at this time. --] 05:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

== Re: your unfounded accusations about 3rr ==

Paul: please avoid making unfounded accusations merely because someone disagrees with your point of view. From looking at your talk page, it's obvious that you have had issues with 3rr abuse - but that doesn't give you the right to toss the term about when a change is made to your edits. Thank you. --''']'''''<small><sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></small>'' 16:00, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Ckatz, please understand that the accusation is not unfounded about your reverts - they are clearly recorded on the Eris history page. Secondly, the accusation is not linked to any disagreement - this is the first time you have responded to the note I left about your revert and your response has been marked by wild counter-accusations. Lastly, if you have a problem with my making Eris' number intelligible to the average reader, then please say so, and be kind enough to explain why. ] 16:27, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
:Paul, first off, I've removed the copy of your reply that was pasted onto the talk page for Eris. We are discussing this matter here, and placing your reply on that page - without any context - is not required. --''']'''''<small><sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></small>'' 16:46, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
:Secondly, you accused me of approaching 3rr for '''two''' edits separated by (if I recall correctly) 30 hours. That is not, by any definition, approaching 3rr. When you apply that label, in a situation where it is not justified, it puts an unfair spin on the conversation. Also, we were disagreeing - you want to add a link to the asteroid list, others (including myself) don't. --''']'''''<small><sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></small>'' 16:51, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
:Finally, I don't ''"have a problem with my making Eris' number intelligible to the average reader,"'' as you so kindly stated. However, your link does not help to clarify the situation. It merely points people to a long list of minor planet designations, without any context or explanation. If anything, it will confuse the ''"average reader"'' by leading them to think that Eris is an asteroid - which it most definitely is not. --''']'''''<small><sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></small>'' 17:00, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Dear Ckatz, Unlike you I don't remove comments that reflect poorly on me from my page - I'd rather retain a true record of the comments I've had. Secondly, I '''know''' that you disagree with me on the asteroid list issue, but to date you have not explained '''why'''. Having the support of other editors doesn't automatically make it right, otherwise we'll soon be voting on whether 2+2=4, and if the majority say it's 5, then we'll just have to accept it. Democracy in action. By the way, do look at the Misplaced Pages article ] - you might learn something. Enjoy your day. ] 17:06, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

:Paul, did you read the third point above before writing your last comment? Also, there's a big difference between removing "comments that reflect poorly" and comments that are '''unfair'''. On my page, I leave the fair comments (as anyone who looks at it will see) and remove the unjustified accusations. --''']'''''<small><sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></small>'' 17:17, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello Ckatz, No, I had not read your 3rd point, because when I replied you had not yet added it. However, if you read the Eris talk page you will see that I stated very clearly that a body of professional astronomers had added Eris to the list of asteroids, and I certainly am not going to disagree with them. Also, if you read ], you will see that the name includes a great deal more than you seem to think. Finally, weeding out the comments you regard as unfair, tells me something about you. May wisdom smite your brow. ] 17:28, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

:Paul, two points: first, I had added the point before you replied - the log shows that quite clearly. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, of course, you could well have started to write your comment while I was saving mine - but then you would have received the "edit conflict" dialogue when you went to save. Whatever - it's not really that important. However, reflecting back on the comment you left on my page yesterday (''"I know that Eris is not considered an asteroid now, but when it was discovered the astronomers did not have the benefit of our 20-20 hindsight and added it to the list of asteroids."''), you should note that Eris was added to the catalogue of minor planets on September 7th, 2006. The number was also assigned at that time. That would seem to rule out the notion of "hindsight". --''']'''''<small><sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></small>'' 18:24, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ckatz, Thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt - I don't lie or twist situations to show myself in a better light. Not that it's important, but your analysis of the timing is spot on, including the "conflict of edit". And quite right about my misconception yesterday re asteroids - I read quite a bit about them between then and today, so that I certainly had a few mistaken notions cleared up as well (I hope yours were too!!). You know I hate this point-scoring and I live in the fond hope that two putatively intelligent people approaching the same problem from entirely different points of view might just come to an agreement about how best to resolve it. Lechaim! ] 22:19, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

:I've updated the link to point to a different list (]) that lists the numbered objects, and alos provides links to help understand these objects. --''']'''''<small><sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub></small>'' 19:21, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Dear Ckatz,the TNO link, besides being in chronological order (which makes it difficult to locate Eris), contains less information than the list of asteroids - no discoverers or telescope location fields. The text at the bottom of the list of asteroids page also provides a full explanation of the system used. I've set the link back to the asteroid list. Hope this meets with your approval. ] 06:59, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

==Re: Eris==
I removed the links because they are innapropriate in the lead sentance of the article. The designation "136199 Eris" is an alernative designation of the dwarf planet Eris, which is why it is bold in the lead. In addition, the links were innapropriate given the context in that section. The link to the list of minor planets would fit much better in the "see also" section at the bottom of the article, and the link to ] was redundant, seeing as it is also linked in the name section of the article, where it has a much better context. For more information, please see ]. ] 18:43, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree that the link to the list of minor planets is relevant, and a link to an explanation of the number would also be relevant. I question putting them in the lead section of the article, but I would support such an explanation in the name section of the article. It's so nice to have a civil conversation about a disputed edit for once :) ] 19:02, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

==]==
As one who has previously contributed to the above article, you might be interested to know that the ] (childhood and early adulthood, 1870-1895) is up for FA nomination at the moment. Any contribution, whether a vote for/against or a suggestion for improvement, would be very much appreciated. The eventual intention is to raise ] and its detailed sub-articles to FAs - this is the first to be completed and to go forward for nomination.

]

Best wishes, ]<sup>]</sup> 15:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

== ] ==
See the when I changed this to ''ball''. A sphere is technically the surface of a ball. The Latin means ball. Though some people call this a sphere, this word is ambiguous, whereas ball is not. Am I being reasonable here? ] 20:07, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello Stephen, Chambers: "sphere - 1.a solid figure bounded by a surface etc : 2.its bounding surface" When I studied geometry we differentiated between the solid and the surface by using "sphere" and "spherical surface" which I suppose was technical. "Ball" comes in for the same degree of ambiguity - think of cricket ball (solid) and tennis ball (hollow shell). Language can be a devil, and when you consider that it's all we have, it's all the more amazing that we don't have dozens of disasters like the Mars Lander which cost the taxpayer billions, because one team was working in miles and the other in kilometres - very distressing! The real question of course, is whether to apply ball or sphere, ambiguous as both are, to a globular cluster which is neither solid nor a hollow shell; which makes one wonder whether the person who originally used the term in this context (of globular cluster), was simply casting around for a phrase which would denote a spherical shape, without deep philosophical implications about its internal solidity.
I just think on balance that 'sphere' sounds so much more rounded and technical, don't you? ] 22:02, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

: I come from a mathematical background that agrees with the ] article definition. I agree that to many people, a sphere is not S<sup>2</sup>, but a solid shape, and a ] is something you play games with. The article is supposed to be aimed at the general reader, so perhaps sphere is more clear and ''scientific'' to them. ] 22:09, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

== Image:Gandhi1.jpg ==

Hi, you are using ] under fair use. It would be fair use only if used to illustrate the stamp in question (as opposed to things appearing in the stamp's design). I have added the {{tl|fair use disputed}} tag to the image. Please let me know if there are any questions -- ]] 17:41, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
==License tagging for Image:Linnaeus00.jpg==
Thanks for uploading ]. Misplaced Pages gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Misplaced Pages, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an ] applied to the ] 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 ]. 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 ]. 12:06, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

== 3rr ==

Beware that 3rr only applies for exceeding 3 reverts in 24 hours. ] 08:47, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

== Engler ==
Thank you for the compliments, but I was not me that added the picture, nor that removed the full name.
Sorry, but I didn't understand your question. Cheers.-- ] 16:46, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

==Image copyright problem with Image:Podocarpus macrophyllus inumaki part.jpg==
Thanks for uploading ]. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The ] is very careful about the images included in ] because of ] (see Misplaced Pages's ]).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Misplaced Pages are ], ], and ]. Find the appropriate template in ] and place it on the image page like this: <code>{&#123;TemplateName}}</code>. If you have not already done so, please also include the source of the image. In many cases this will be the website where you found it.

Please specify the copyright information and source on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the ]. Thank you. ] 20:24, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

*Ok, I have fixed it for you. There were a couple problems:
**When I lined the image name, it showed up as a red link, meaning such image does not exist. Therefore I could not verify your claim.
**You did not provide all the original info: author, upload date, location, decription, etc. Author and link to source were the most important things you missed.
**You selected a wrong tag. You have to license any modifications under the same license as the original author. Therefore {{tl|wikipedia-screenshot}} was completely unsuitable.
*Please be more careful next time, and provide as much info in the description field as possible. It always helps. ] 00:43, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
==Image copyright problem with Image:Cedara00.jpg==
Thanks for uploading ]. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate ], it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by ]. For assistance on the image use policy, see ]. 06:12, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

==References==
Hi! I saw that you created ]. Do you have any references for your work? It would help make the article even better. Thanks! -] 01:09, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

== Stellar sorting ==

Can we discuss your stellar sorting addition on the globular cluster page, rather than turning this into an edit war? &mdash; ] (]) 20:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
:But of course - I didn't think that an editing war was in the offing.... Do you not feel that the addition properly belongs in an article on globular clusters? I have to admit that I was rather puzzled as to the reason for the rather peremptory removal of the addition and thought that I had run foul of one of those self-appointed guardians of articles - one finds them, unfortunately, all over WP, and they seem to be more concerned with imposing their will, rather than advancing knowledge of a subject. So I do hope one can have an amicable collaboration. Have an excellent day. ] 21:18, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
::Have just looked at your new arrangement of the section and it seems just fine - thank you! ] 21:50, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

== ]] ==

Another editor, ]&nbsp;(]{{·}} ]{{·}} <span class="plainlinks" style="color:#002bb8"></span>), made the following comment about the article ]:
:This needs to be made into an encyclopedia article or it will be deleted. This article must be written from a neutral point of view citing sources. See other articles for examples

I agree with Centrx. The article needs work. --] (] | ] 23:00, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

== Image:Swedishbitters01.JPG listed for deletion ==
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —] ] 03:29, 15 November 2006 (UTC)<!-- Template:Idw -->

== Image:Swedishbitters02.JPG listed for deletion ==
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —] <small>] ]</small> 22:29, 16 November 2006 (UTC)<!-- Template:Idw -->

== Image:Swedishbitters01.jpg listed for deletion ==
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —] <small>] ]</small> 22:30, 16 November 2006 (UTC)<!-- Template:Idw -->

==Orphaned fair use image (Image:4711a.jpg)==
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Misplaced Pages and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see ]).

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 "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages 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 ]. Thank you. ] <small>] ]</small> 22:31, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

==Orphaned fair use image (Image:Mcsa00.jpg)==
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Misplaced Pages and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see ]).

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 "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages 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 ]. Thank you. ] <small>] ]</small> 22:32, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

== Image:Harry bolus.JPG listed for deletion ==
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —] <small>] ]</small> 22:34, 16 November 2006 (UTC)<!-- Template:Idw -->

== Image:Magaliesberg01.JPG listed for deletion ==
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —] <small>] ]</small> 22:40, 16 November 2006 (UTC)<!-- Template:Idw -->

== Image:Magaliesberg00.jpg listed for deletion ==
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ]. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —] <small>] ]</small> 22:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)<!-- Template:Idw -->

== Orphaned public domain images ==

The following images were uploaded by you, but are currently not in use. They have been tagged as public domain (PD), either as PD-self or other PD claim, or equivilant. These unused PD images may be subject to deletion as orphans. You may wish to add them to an article, tag them for copying to WP commons {{tl|Copy to Wikimedia Commons}} or if they are no longer needed, they can be nominated for deletion by following the easy three step process at Images and media for . If you have any questions, please leave me a note on my talk page. --] <small>] ]</small> 22:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]

Hi Gay Cdn, If they're orphans, they must go. It would be a good idea to have a clean-up procedure in place, so that at the end of an upload session, one could remove the unnecessary clutter images. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. ] 07:04, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

== ] ==

You said on this article's talk page that you have obtained permission to use it. Could you please:
#Make sure that the permission is to ''release it under the GFDL'', as that is necessary for use on Misplaced Pages, and
#forward the email granting permission (assuming it is an email) to permissions (at) wikimedia (dot) org?
:Thanks, --]<sup>]</sup> 05:44, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
::Hi Robth, Permission was granted via a phone conversation with Mike Raath of the Institute. I'm sure that if my word on this is not sufficient, I can obtain an email from Raath to confirm. It really is a pity that AED is pursuing these maliciously petty actions; there obviously is an enormous gulf between our goals and agendas. Have an excellent day. ] 06:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
:::Please do obtain an email; we need to have a record of the release, and make sure that the copyright holder understands the terms they are releasing the content under. --]<sup>]</sup>

::::Herewith the reqd email copy
Hello Paul,

Appended below is an exchange between me and Bruce Rubidge, in which he
says you can go ahead with the material you asked for. Is this
sufficient for the Misplaced Pages people?

Mike

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Misplaced Pages article on James Kitching
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 14:19:26 +0200
From: Bruce Rubidge <rubidgeb@geosciences.wits.ac.za>
To: <raathm@geosciences.wits.ac.za>
References: <4561D585.4030602@geosciences.wits.ac.za>



Dear Mike

I am happy that they go ahead - it is always nice if they simply say Source
is BPI Palaeontology. Will see you at tea time

Bruce

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Raath" <raathm@geosciences.wits.ac.za>
To: "Prof Bruce Rubidge" <rubidgeb@geosciences.wits.ac.za>
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 6:19 PM
Subject: Misplaced Pages article on James Kitching


> Bruce,
>
> Some time ago a man called Paul Venter contacted me to ask if he could
> use one of the photos of the dinosaur eggs and embryos in a piece he was
> doing on James Kitching for the 'Misplaced Pages' website. I told him that since
> it was already in the public domain, as long as he properly acknowledged
> it, it was OK. He has subsequently come back to ask if he might use other
> material that is on the BPI website for the same purpose. Initially I told
> him the same -- acknowledge it, and you can use it. He has now come back
> to say that the Misplaced Pages owners want an email from us confirming that we
> don't mind, and also confirming that once it is on their site, anyone can
> use it without copyright problems. I asked Paul to let me know just what
> material he was wanting to use, and that I would then put it to you as
> Director of the BPI.
>
> He has replied to say it is the material dealing with James that is on the
> BPI website, specifically what is in the 'History' page, as well as
> 'Research' and 'Journal'. My feeling is to say 'go ahead', but it really
> is up to you. What do you think?
>
> Mike

--
------------------------
Dr Mike Raath
University Collections Curator
c/o BPI (Pal), Wits University
email: raathm@geosciences.wits.ac.za
Phone: +27-11 717-6683
Fax: +27-11 403-1423

:Could you please forward that to permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org? We need to have it in the records. --]<sup>]</sup> 20:07, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

== Selig Percy Amoils ==

Please do not remove properly sourced material from articles. It is vandalism. And please read ]. There is no requirement to consult living people on the content of their articles.--] 13:37, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

:The following note was posted on Runcorn's talk page - Hi Runcorn, I would like to draw your attention to Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons This policy in a nutshell: Misplaced Pages articles about living people can affect the subject's life. They must therefore be written with the greatest of care and attention to verifiability, neutrality and avoiding original research, particularly regarding any controversial material.

Jewishness is a very sensitive issue with some people and before placing Amoils in that category, I think that in terms of the guideline above, the very least that should be done before categorising, is to ask the subject for his feelings on the matter. Just a thought..... Have a good day. Paul venter 13:04, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

and noticed the following on the same page -
'''Tagging living people as Jews'''

Dear Runcorn,
perhaps it is time that we had a general discussion at the village pump. Would you care to join it? Bellbird 10:22, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

] 14:29, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

'''Please do not remove content from Misplaced Pages{{#if:Selig Percy Amoils|, as you did to ]}}. It is considered ]. If you would like to experiment, please use the ]. Thank you. <!-- Template:Test2a (Second level warning) --> '''--] 22:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
:In what strange recess of your mind do you feel that removing an inflammatory category from an article is vandalism? Please check the meaning of the word - I'm not here to fill the gaps in your education. ] 07:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank or remove content from Misplaced Pages, as you did to ], you will be ] from editing Misplaced Pages. <!-- Template:Test3a-n (Third level blanking/removing warning) --> --] 11:30, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

:] This is your '''last warning'''. <br>The next time you blank or remove material from a page, as you did to ], you ''will'' be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. <!-- Template:Test4a-n (Fourth level warning) -->--] 13:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

==''Rhus''==
Hi Paul - thanks for adding the African species to the species list, a very useful improvement which makes the page better reflect the diversity of the genus. Do you have a reference for them you could add to the refs list, please? - thanks, ] 12:53, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi MPF - have done so. Rod Moffett has recently revised the genus, so I'll get a new list from him and paste it on the page. Cheers ] 20:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

:Many thanks! Best to keep the species list as just covering species; the varieties and subspecies belong on the relevant species pages (when they get written!). - ] 11:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

==Your snow leopard image==
This is indeed a great image. A caption (saying where it was taken etc) would be great though! Thanks! ]] 10:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
:PS I did a search on the web for Bernard Landgraf and found some pictures, like his featured pictures of the day for the , but that is taken in a zoo. Similarly, his featured lynx picture, has the makings of a zoo picture. My only concern is that if the snow leopard picture was taken in a zoo, then it doesn't make as much sense in the section on conservation (in the wild), even though I agree with you that it gives a much better idea of the physical form of the snow leopard. The picture of the cub in the national park in Ladakh will then make more sense, especially since the news report is about Ladakh. That's why the caption is important. Thanks! ]] 11:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
::PPS Hi again, I checked the Bernard Landgraf image and it is taken with a Cannon EOS 20D digital camera, which is not a camera a wildlife photographer would normally use. Given the difficulty of photographing snow leopards in the wild, it makes it highly likely that the Landgraf image was taken in a zoo. I am therefore putting the Ladakh image back into the article, but I have altered it to make it bigger and to make the physical form more visible. However, I like the Landgraf image. When the article is expanded a little more, which I plan to do, I will put the Landgraf image back in. Will that be OK with you? Thanks! ]] 12:05, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi Sorry! should have put in details, but there simply weren't any. The image comes from Wikimedia - click on the logo on the ] page. Perhaps the person who uploaded it Bernard Landgraf?? might know. ] 12:13, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

==Orphaned fair use image (Image:Gelada00.jpg)==
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see ]).

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 "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages 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 ]. Thank you. This is an automated message from ] 12:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
==License tagging for Image:Rosa Hope01.JPG==
Thanks for uploading ]. Misplaced Pages gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Misplaced Pages, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an ] applied to the ] 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 ]. 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 ]. 22:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

==Image copyright problem with Image:Pinhal11a.jpg==

Thank you for uploading ]. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Misplaced Pages takes ] very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the '''license''' and the '''source''' of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a ''']''' to the ].

'''If you created this image yourself, please look at ], select one of those tags, and add it to the image. To do that, simply go to ], click "edit this page", and add the appropriate tag. Be sure to remove the current tag indicating a lack of licensing!'''

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me at ] or at the ]. Thanks again for your cooperation. —]] 14:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
==Image copyright problem with Image:Pincan21a.jpg==

Thank you for uploading ]. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Misplaced Pages takes ] very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the '''license''' and the '''source''' of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a ''']''' to the ].

'''If you created this image yourself, please look at ], select one of those tags, and add it to the image. To do that, simply go to ], click "edit this page", and add the appropriate tag. Be sure to remove the current tag indicating a lack of licensing!'''

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me at ] or at the ]. Thanks again for your cooperation. —]] 14:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

==Orphaned fair use image (Image:Mother Teresa2.gif)==
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently ], meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. ] if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see ]).

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 "]" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages 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 ]. Thank you. This is an automated message from ] 22:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

==John Hutchinson (botanist)==
Thank you for editing the article on ] by adding in John Hutchinson. Just a couple of things, (1) I have corrected the link to John Hutchinson piping it to ] (it is always good to preview and check one's links); (2) we need a reference that shows that John Hutchinson was awarded the honour and what year he received it (the dates after each name are the year they received the award, and the names are listed in chronological order of award date). As you may note, I have fixed the award. It was 1944. Thanks again for your edits. --] 19:39, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

== Cats ==

Given the length of your contribution history, I was very surprised to see three weird, empty articles: "Classification: Germany: People: By occupation: German ...s". Please read ]. -- ] 08:23, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
:Hello Haworth, Yes I'm afraid I'm having great problems in categorising properly. If you look at ] and click on the categories of German taxonomists and German collectors, then you find the categories almost empty - I can only assume that these are orphan categories and that somehow I have misplaced Kurt Dinter. The tutorial on new categories I find very confusing. If you can help I'd be most appreciative. ] 08:35, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
I think the answers are: ] is simply too vague to be worth having - it would lump together collectors of Meissen porcelain, stamp collectors and butterfly collectors. I am slightly surprised there is not even a ] but I think the answer is that these people are better categorised under the branch of biology they worked in. -- ] 09:02, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

== Warning ==

If you continue to move the image at ], against consensus and Misplaced Pages guidelines, you will be blocked from editing for disruption. --] (]) 12:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

:Dear Mel Etitis, Someone obviously showed bad judgement in giving you blocking powers to enforce your POV. The consensus you talk about consists of three editors who are hidebound in their conservatism and interpretation of guidelines. Block to your heart's content, and the only thing it will prove is your abuse of power which you should not have been given in the first place. ] 14:19, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

::First, I didn't say that I'd block you; I can guarantee, though, that someone will. Secondly, it isn't only three editors; I counted at least five editors beside myself, all of whom disagree with you. --] (]) 14:34, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Paul, please desist from making personal attacks on my attitude and views and whether they are beneficial or not. I am trying really hard to assume good faith on your part, respect your views, and build a consensus in keeping with what everyone has to say. I expect the same courtesy from you.] 12:25, 11 March 2007
(UTC).
::First of all, if you wish to leave any messages for me (which I hope you won't), please do so in the ]. Secondly, if you see ] I have consistenetly tried to respect your views and tried to make you see mine (ours). In fact everyone has before you've started calling everyone dinosaurs and Tyrannosaurs etc etc and accused them baselessly of engaging personal attacks and ultimately managed to piss them off. I have even gone to the ] to solve this issue, to build a broader consensus with more editors. Thirdly, you've consistently tried not to see anybody else's point, and insisted that you're point holds or the photo gets withdrawn, much like a school kid wanting to get included in the team. And lastly, I have stopped assuming good faith on your part, because obviously you do not wish to engage in a constructive process. I do not wish to carry on this conversation. Please do not post on my talk page (or even my user page) unless if it's a matter of life-and-death.] 14:58, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
PS: I did not understand what you meant by your message.
:::Which is exactly why you should not be editing the English version of Misplaced Pages........] 05:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

::'''"I have consistenetly tried to respect your views" "huge abominable photo" "quite a rude shock actually"''' Rueben, these are your comments and if you can't laugh hysterically when you see their inconsistency, then you really do wear rose-coloured blinkers about yourself. ] 16:21, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

== ] ==
Dear Bhadani, I find that the person who supplied the above photo misunderstood the terms of free licensing. I would therefor appreciate it if you could put this image up for speedy deletion. Much obliged ] 14:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
:Are you sure or is it your guess? I personally feel that the grand mother may have supplied the picture for personal use of the recipient, but we should ask the recipient. What do you suggest? --] 18:27, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
:: Ho-ho.... I don't know what to do - what are your thoughts? ] 19:03, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

==]==
Hi the correct location of an article about a baronet is either on '''John Smith''' or if this is occupied (or if its necessary for disambiguation) on '''Sir John Smith, 1st Baronet''', but in no case on '''John Smith, 1st Baronet''' (see also ]). Greetings <span style="color:darkgreen">~~ ] <sub>]</sub> 04:48, 13 March 2007 (UTC) ~~ </span>
==Image tagging for Image:Charles Davidson Bell03.jpg==
Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by ]. For assistance on the image use policy, see ]. 04:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

== ] ==
Hi Bhadani, thank you for sorting out the Jonty Rhodes image. I have another problem with which I would appreciate your help. I started an article under the title of ] which was moved to ] and then moved to ]. Wiki guidelines suggest that the suffix should never be used without the prefix, and that if possible the title should read plain ] or in this case ]. The system objects if I try to revert it, so could you please put the article back under ]. Much obliged ] 06:42, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
:Sorry. I could not give attention to the issue due to ] issues, and shortage of time. Regards. --] 10:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

==] ==
I see that you have created a superior article to the one ], the same person.
] 01:33, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
:Oops!! And I thought I'd done a proper search....... I'll do a redirect. Thanks for pointing it out. ] 07:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
::That's fine.. I adjusted the images..] 09:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
==Unspecified source for Image:Magaliesberg00a.jpg==

Thanks for uploading ''']'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the ] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then 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, then 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 {{tl|GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the ]. If you believe the media meets the criteria at ], use a tag such as {{tlp|fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at ]. See ] 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 . '''Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged''', as described on ]. If the image is copyrighted under a ] (per ]) then '''the image will be deleted ] after 19:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)'''. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you. ] 19:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

==Other baronetcies in South Africa==
Which please? - ]<small>]</small> 07:32, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
:Check ] to start with. ] 07:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
::There are 5 shown there - plus Sir David Harris who might be a knight or a baronet. Plus Graaf, makes 6 or 7. I am hoping to track down 12. - ]<small>]</small> 09:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

==Shame==
Shame you can't be civil. It somewhat amazes me that you are ignoring so many people. Many people have now told you how the article should he correctly titled, yet you ignore them. May I remind you do not own the article, so comments like "Article Under Construction" and "I know this must be difficult for you, but would you mind keeping your hands off this article until I have finished it?" (to Proteus) are totally unwarranted. Anyone may edit a Misplaced Pages article, and just because you created it you cannot tell other not to. --] 17:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
:I don't think you should be using long words like "polite" when you don't understand their meaning. As for the correct form for Lady XXXX, look at the Misplaced Pages counterexamples on your talk page. Have a good day ] 17:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
::Not quite sure what that was meant to achieve. Regardless many of the people on that list (and they weren't all people) are daughters of peers, so different rules apply. --] 17:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
:::Oh dear I don't see you lasting long on Misplaced Pages unless you start being more polite to people and remember that Misplaced Pages is a joint effort. And the counterexamples, some weren't people, many were peers' daughters and many were redirects. --] 17:21, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
::::I'm perfectly aware that they weren't all people - I was not going to waste my time sifting through them for your benefit. Next time you quote Wiki policy, kindly add a link I can follow so as to be just as enlightened as you. Also I have great difficulty in being polite to incorrigible idiots ] 17:27, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
:::::I see I'm myself and Proteus are idiots because we disagree with you. Well that makes you language perfectly acceptable of course! I really would advise that if you wish to get on well with people on Misplaced Pages, you should be polite to '''everyone'''. --] 17:30, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
::::::Talk pages are for discussion '''before''' being heavy-handed and changing things to your liking.....as for the "idiot" bit, if the shoe fits....] 17:33, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
:::::::Amazing, you don't even back down, you just keep insulting. You are clearly not worth talking to, but as a last comment I will say my edits were not heavy-handed, they were fairly minor edits (adding 2 categories, changing the opening line to conform with MofS etc), and certainly not worthy of TalkPage before. --] 17:37, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
You seem to have a very broad view of what constitutes an insult. ] 17:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

No, I won't "keep my hands off" that article, or any others you've created. Firstly, Template:Underconstruction is intended to prevent edit conflicts whilst a major revamp is underway, not to stifle legitimate edits just because you like a particular article, and I'm going to remove it for that reason. Secondly, the fact that you've created an article doesn't give you the right to decide where it should be and how it should be formatted: such matters are matters of policy and WP usage, and aren't things to be sorted out as the article's being written, and I'm going to revert your edits reverting mine for ''that'' reason. I suggest, if you intend on being a constructive editor here, you learn how to interact with people on a reasonable basis, and not act as if you own a particular article, because, I'm sorry to have to tell you, you don't. ] ] 00:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

:You keep saying "not in keeping with the majority of WP articles on similar people". Like who? ] and ] spring out as obvious counter-examples, and I can't think of any just at "Lady Surname". ] ] 09:30, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

::You do realise the index lists redirects as well? I'm certainly not searching through it looking for articles that support you. I'd like some examples, which you've said exist, of the wife of a knight being at "Lady Surname". I'm afraid the daughters of peers being at "Lady Forename Surname" (which ''is'' the correct place for ''them'') is utterly irrelevant. ] ] 10:41, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, as already said here the correct form might be Lady Philipps, but we use ] for a better clarity (see also ]). <span style="color:darkgreen">~~ ] <sub>]</sub> 18:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC) ~~ </span>

:To: {{User|Berks105}} and {{User|Paul venter}}
:From: {{User|Kevinkor2}}
:I recommend that both of you '''stop''' renaming the article about Dorothea Sarah Florence Alexandra, Lady Phillips.
:These actions are interfering with your common goal: To get the best article on Lady Phillips possible.
:Until active editting has stopped, treat the name of the article as a placeholder. After active editting has stopped, we can rename it if necessary.
:--] 20:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

== Lots of articles ==

Thank you, Paul, for creating and/or expanding the following articles:
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]

Also, thank you for populating the categories:
* ]
* ]

I have put an {{tl|Underconstruction}} tag at the top of articles you indicated you were working on.

Please add an {{tl|Inuse}} tag on articles you are actively editting (and remove it when you are done for the day). This will help reduce edit conflicts. Thank you.

--] 18:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

::Whoa!. You and Proteus..... IMHO Proteus is generally peremptive, terse, and discourteous but he is almost always right. He understands nuances of MOS very well indeed. Do try to work with him if possible. :) - ]<small>]</small> 06:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Here are some more articles you have created/expanded:
* {{la|Hermann Eckstein}}
* {{la|Julius Wernher}}
* {{la|Sammy Marks}}
I appreciate your work!

; Note : Even if you label an edit "revert vandalism", it still counts as a revert for the purposes of the ] if the change was ] (for example, a stubborn edit dispute).

I pray you will have joy editting! --] 17:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

== Re: Incivil comments in edit summary at ] ==

You may want to avoid getting into an edit war at ], which is what appears to be happening. I saw your recent revert, and it appears that the edit you reverted showed no signs of vandalism at all. In addition, the use of the phrase "incorrigible idiot" in the edit summary constitutes a ]. If you feel that the edits of the user in question do not significantly improve the article in question, please take it up on the articles talk page. If the user in question refuses to enter into a discussion, then you may bring it up at ], but being rude and ] and continuing to revert edits as vandalism when they are clearly not will not serve you well. --]|]|] 05:04, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

:Dear Jayron32, Thank you for your comments on Albu. However, I must express surprise that you feel removing 2 images from the page (repeatedly) and rearranging the rest, does not constitute vandalism. If Berks had discussed the issue before his summary edits, which are simply labelled "not necessary", there might be some justification for his actions. See ] and ] for similar behaviour. Unfortunately Berks has decided to target me and will carry on with his harassment until he is stopped or grows bored. ] 05:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

::It should be noted that the user in question has left an explanation of his/her edits at the Talk Page of the article where you reverted his edits, concisely and reasonably explaining why the changes were made. Please take up a discussion at the article's talk page before blindly reverting the work of others. Remember, you don't ] this or any other article, and the collaborative nature of wikipedia is hurt when you engage in ] and other ] behavior. I have started an incident report at ] requesting further investigation into the matter. I am officially neutral on the situation; I am currently finding no fault in either you or Berks' actions, but the edit warring needs to cease. --]|]|] 05:29, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

:::Certainly I would like this edit-warring to end, but I think Berks' stamina for reverting is far greater than mine - also dealing with the irritation of constantly having to watch these pages, diverts one's energy from more useful input.] 09:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

::::Berks wrote '''"A picture of his wife is unnecessary. This is an article about George Albu and a photo of Lady Albu just isn't warranted. Secondly, photos should not be placed so they squeeze the text like that, and they don't need to be that large either"'''. These are simply personal views and are not backed by MOS. I don't feel that this is a reasonable explanation. ] 05:50, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

:::::There are venues where this situation should be hashed out, but '''my talk page''' is not one of them. As I have mentioned, I hold no opinion of fault in the matter, and I will continue to do so. I have not interest in mediating this problem between the two of you. If you feel the situation needs additional review, some of the places where you can take the situation are:
:::::*Request for Comment ]
:::::*Request for Page Protection ]
:::::*The Mediation Cabal ]
:::::*The Guerilla Mediation Network ]
:::::*The Mediation Committee ]
:::::*Community Enforcable Mediation ]
:::::*The Administrator Noticeboard ]
:::::*The Arbitration Committee ]
:::::As I noted above, I have already started a report at ] over this matter, please take all discussions there in the future. If you wish, I (or you) can also start a report at any of the above venues. Please cease and desist until the matter is resolved. Thank you. --]|]|] 14:35, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


== AIV ==

Hello, I'm not a sysop but I noticed you reported a user on AIV and you left a new section and a long description, when reporting their please keep it short and list them in the form of <nowiki>{{vandal|username goes here}}</nowiki> and it makes it quicker and easier for sysops to block users if this is necessary. Thank you - <b>]]</b> 13:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

== ] ==

You a user who is stalking you ]. I have removed that report. Please post that comment ]. Thanks. --May the Force be with you! ]e] 13:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

==Size of pictures==
There seems to be a general consensus that 200px is preferable to 300px. Nevertheless you keep re-enlarging them back to 300px. Do you mind arguing why your perspective is right rather than seeking to overrule general opinion. I thought here is a good place to do so since it only concerns you - but it affects numerous articles to which you have contributed. - ]<small>]</small> 20:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
:Hello Kitty, No, I don't think I'm right, just as I don't think the anonymous supporters of smaller images are wrong. There is no right or wrong here, but simply a question of taste. Layout of a page is an aesthetic matter, and just as beauty in a person's face is not something that lends itself to rigid formulae or numbers, so every person's idea of what is pleasing and attractive is different. For example, I think that an infobox or succession box is an aesthetic abomination and that the information it displays can be presented without the accompanying rectilinear eyesore. But there we are - consensus has obviously decided that boxes are useful and good and so it becomes normal and then traditional and finally a rigid rule that no one dares challenge. I just find it a pity that despite the WP injunction to be bold and try new and different ideas, there are a dozen editors willing to jump on an innovator and hurriedly point out that this is not the way things are done and to quote a score of WP guidelines that purportedly support their point of view. That way, I feel, lies stagnation and eventual decay of the entire system. To cut a rambling speech short, a few salient points
#There is nothing special about 300px or 200px - when I'm putting together an article, I shrink or expand images on a page until the effect looks good.
#I think aesthetics gets short shrift on most WP pages ie they look ugly - I wrote a bit at the Village Pump a few weeks ago, suggesting a group focused purely on a facelift for WP.
] 21:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
::The problems with "until the effect looks good" include (1) different browsers (2) different display settings (3) different views as to what looks best. How do we achieve consensus? - ]<small>]</small> 23:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
:::I don't know - I'm not a politician or statesman; it needs a wiser head than mine. What I do know is that the consensus thing is abused - when some editor wants to get his POV accepted, he quickly invites his friends to the page and claims consensus. WP repeatedly warns against voting, because it always leaves someone disgruntled. To me, images are important and shouldn't be squeezed until a hand-lens is needed (see a long harangue that took place at Jonty Rhodes). The chronically irritating aspect of this whole editing war, is that a lot of the people actively engaged in warring, ''never write articles''.(I'm quite serious about this - take 30 minutes sometime and work through the contributions of some of the noisiest editors and you'll find that they do nothing else but trivial editing and writing one sentence pieces which they grandly label "started article") Cheers ] 07:16, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
::::So let us go with '''policy which should be followed''' as below. - ]<small>]</small> 08:29, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::Oh dear, are you joining the ranks of those who shelter behind Misplaced Pages policy, believing that it has been handed down by God himself? The idea behind all policy is to improve articles and as I pointed out elsewhere, the policy is open to subjective interpretation. Take the excerpt from policy quoted below "you should ''generally'' use the thumbnail option" - that word reads ''generally'' not ''always''. One should guard against becoming overly rigid about these issues. Watching my back ] 09:30, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
::::::Unless there is good cause to divert from it, yes. I don't think that good cause exists in the case of ]. - ]<small>]</small> 09:43, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::::I don't agree......] 10:05, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
::::::::Clearly. Why should your view take priority over consensus? - ]<small>]</small> 10:44, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Have you not read any of my comments above? I'm tired of fighting people who do very little that is constructive and find their pleasure in hacking articles. If that is really what you want to do, feel free. I thought you were different, but was obviously mistaken.....] 10:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
:Please compare your entries with mine at and then tell me why we should go with your views. - ]<small>]</small> 11:22, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

===Policy===
Please note there is a policy relating to image size which should be followed ]:
:In articles, if you wish to have a photo beside the text, you should generally use the "thumbnail" option available in the "Image markup" (this results in 180 pixels wide display in standard preferences default setting).
There is also a guideline ]:
:*Specifying the size of a thumb image is not recommended: without specifying a size the width will be what the reader has specified in their ], with a default of 180px (which applies for most readers). However, the image subject or image properties may call for a specific image width in order to enhance the readability and/or layout of an article. Cases where specific image width are considered appropriate include:

::* On images with extreme aspect ratios
::* When using detailed maps, diagrams or charts
::* When a small region of an image is considered relevant, but the image would lose its coherence when cropped to that region

::Bear in mind that some users need to configure their systems to display large text. Forced large thumbnails can leave little width for text, making reading difficult.

::The current image markup language is:

::<code><nowiki>]</nowiki></code>

] 23:56, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:39, 1 April 2007