Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:13, 22 February 2006

For archived talk please see:

• Archive 1 (April 2004 - July 2005)
• Archive 2 (July 2005 - January 2006)

Disambiguating Queen

• Hello there... You are forgiven for altering my Userpage, since I do prefer the link for Queen to go to the band, not the article on Queens. I just wish you would have dropped a note on my talk page. Thanks for being clear however in the reason for the change. Have a nice day! Lady Aleena | Talk 18:58, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
  • It is not a big deal. I have also gone through and disambiguated a few userpages in my time here. I know the trepidation. The user pages are edittable by anyone like everything else, so if something is wrong on my user page, then I would prefer it get fixed then to stay wrong. As long as you continue to be clear with the reason for the change, you can edit my page if I am ever in error anytime. Lady Aleena 01:54, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks for fixing my Queen link. ADman 20:57, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

• Hello...it's a shame that it can't have the band name as one thing (Queen) and the link to another (Queen (band)). Sorry for this, but I'm going to revert it, I prefer the old version. Andymc 23:06, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:John Reid photo.jpg

Thank you! ComputerJoe 20:44, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Spirit AeroSystems

Some of the articles on it only mention civil stuff. If the Eurofighter had been involved, I think they would have mentioned it or that BAE Systems and Lockheed would still be a customer. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 14:19, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

What surprised me was that this group was not included when Airbus was converted to SCE form. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 14:32, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps, but there are Boeing divisions (Jeppesen, Boeing Australia, and Connexion by Boeing to name three) that supply Airbus. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 17:33, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Signature

It's very easy. Wanna know how? ComputerJoe 18:24, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Hell no, it wouldn't be copying, most Wikipedians do it. And also, you still just use ~~~~. ComputerJoe 08:12, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Type45sampson.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Type45sampson.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Misplaced Pages because of copyright law (see Misplaced Pages's Copyright policy).

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 open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information 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. Thank you. Dethomas 15:38, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your message. Since you left your message another user has added the appropriate tag. While I fully admit it was an omission on my part not to add a tag it seems to me that the information I provided (source and the fact the images are intended by the owner to be used for publication) was more than enough for you to add a tag — although you'd be right to argue that it isn't your responsibility to clear up my mess.

The upload was back in my very early days here and if you look at my more recent uploads you will find I always provide source info and appropriate tags. Regards Mark83 18:57, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Glad it got fixed. My Google site searches of type45.com didn't turn up anything about reuse of the images, else a fair use tag or something would have been apropos. Dethomas 07:06, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Strike

Please don't make it a redirect page -- it really needs to be a dab. BCorr|Брайен 20:03, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I think that the problem is that while that may be what the majority of wikilinks are referencing, I think that people looking up "strike" will have a wider variety of meanings in mind -- I can't prove it, but it's my gut reaction. I won't re-revert you, but I think that it's better to pipe the references to "strike" to the appropriate page than to make Strike about labor actions. Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 01:12, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi again -- you've been very patient -- and I now understand what you did and much better see your point and "withdraw" my concern -- I've put it back the way you did it. I'm sorry if I came across as a bit imperious.

With thanks, BCorr|Брайен

Please check your WP:NA entry

Greetings, editor! Your name appears on Misplaced Pages:List of non-admins with high edit counts. If you have not done so lately, please take a look at that page and check your listing to be sure that following the particulars are correct:

1. If you are an admin, please remove your name from the list.
2. If you are currently interested in being considered for adminship, please be sure your name is in bold; if you are opposed to being considered for adminship, please cross out your name (but do not delete it, as it will automatically be re-added in the next page update).
3. Please check to see if you are in the right category for classification by number of edits.

Thank you, and have a wiki wiki day! BDAbramson T 03:44, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Interesting

"Worse than that is your edit summary on the F-16 page: "RV MORONIC VANDALISM BY STUPID ASSHOLE FUCKWANK" In my opinion this is worse than the relatively minor vandalism the user in question is guilty of. Mark83 16:02, 21 February 2006 (UTC)"

How is this worse exactly? His edit messed up an article, and damaged the encyclopedia. My edit fixed it. My language might have been strong, but his edit demanded a robust response. The only people who'll see the language I used are those who get into the metadata and start editing, I'm sure they can handle it. His edit was a part of the article, and made parts of it nonsensical.

So I lost my temper. So what. It makes me angry when vandals get better treatment than editors who are trying to improve things. I notice you're attacking me, and not him. That's not equitable.

But what the hell. Open a RFC on me. Hell, go for ARBCOM. Appeal to Jimbo to have me blocked immediately. Obviously I'm a liability to the project because I dared to call a vandal a nasty name.

I've made a lot of useful contributions, but hell that doesn't matter, because I insulted a vandal. Let's start a witch hunt. I shouldn't be allowed on wikipedia. I'm bad for the project. I'm a waste of space. Block me already. exolon 04:17, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Come on, we're on the same side — we both think vandalism is wrong. I wasn't "attacking" you, I just wanted to raise a flag with you that the language in question should be avoided. There are many templates to produce warnings available at Misplaced Pages:Vandalism.

I don't have the power or wish to block you or raise a RFC. I've had a look through your contributions and you're right, there is a lot of good work there. Mark83 11:35, 22 February 2006 (UTC)