Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:08, 27 April 2006

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome 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:

• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 03:47, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Bombing of Wieluń in World War II

At Talk:Bombing of Wielun in World War II you asked a question. Could you explain your problems a bit? Halibutt 19:17, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)

List of World War II electronic warfare equipment

FYI I have moved the list of code words from H2S radar in to List of World War II electronic warfare equipment. I have added it to a category:World War II electronics. Philip Baird Shearer 02:15, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

German WWII redirects.

I have speedied the "Pazerwagen", I am inclined to leave the other two. Capitalization is likely to be mis-entered, and while you are doubtless correct about the naming convention for aeroplanes, the designation Junkers JU87B-1 returns enough hits to validate a redirect as far as I can tell. If you think I am wrong, you could perhaps stick them on the Redirects for Deletion page? Cheers, Rich Farmbrough 01:44, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

hp vs. PS

You changed the units in the BMW 802 article from hp to PS, and then re-calculated the kW numbers, apparently based on the PS values. I would like to know what source you used to decide to make either of these changes. The source I am using is a 1946 copy of Jane's All The World's Aircraft Engines, which lists values for this engine, and every other, in hp.

Maury 21:09, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Are you really sure Jane's used imperial hp or just translated PS into hp ? I have no source but these PS/hp-ratings you used are too fine to be recalculated from PS to imperial hp. --Denniss 21:29, 2005 Mar 20 (UTC)

Leopard Split

Those are some very valid points! I ran out of time to check for redirects on that article- yes it is important to get those, and ditto for minimizing smaller m edits. Muchenhaeser 19:43, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Ok I did not find any double redirects, so it was fine. The only issue was that pages in other wikis link to the wrong page! Perhaps you with your german and french accounts could change the links on there respective pages to the leo 2 (rather then other page). Muchenhaeser 20:22, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I updated the german and french link. Previously I checked all links to Leopard MBT and changed a lot of them to Leo 2 --Denniss 21:41, 2005 Apr 3 (UTC)

Oh ok duh, you had already fixed the doubles! Thanks for doing all that with the links. Muchenhaeser 21:51, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Apollonia

Hey, it would be both pleasant and good if you could help me translate a little german text on article Apollonia (city) into english. Thank you in advance! --Albanau 18:16, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Leopard 2 images

Hi. Those were some good photos you removed from Leopard 2. Are they all pending deletion, or are you removing them just in case? If the latter, why not leave them, and remove them from the article in the case that they do get deleted? —Michael Z. 2005-10-15 22:18 Z

They all have no source and no license. They look like taken from the manufacturers website and are clearly not available with a somewhat free license required by the commons. If these images are needed/wanted then go to the Leo2 article in the commons and look at the older version with these images, then upload them with promotional tag to the english wikipedia. --Denniss 09:07, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

If you have evidence that these images are copyright violations, then say so. Mark the image pages with copyvio tags, so they can be deleted. Otherwise we are free to use them. It's not your job to strip images out of Misplaced Pages articles just because you have a bad feeling about them. —Michael Z. 2005-10-16 14:48 Z

Aer Lingus

Thanks for your support of my removal of ICAO codes etc in the text of the Aer Lingus article, much appreciated. It looked very strange to have an exact repeat of that data in the infobox - Adrian Pingstone 16:17, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Coppermine-T

Hi Denniss, i'm the guy who submitted the edit for the coppermine-T that you reverted. I can't guarantee ALL BX boards support coppermine-Ts, but there's no question at least the Abit BX-133 RAID does, so it's not accurate to say they are old-core-new-board only as is the impression in the current state. Their last released BIOS notes explicitly list support for 1GHz Celerons which are definitely Coppermine-Ts:

http://www.abit.com.tw/page/sa/download/download_bios_detail.php?pFILE_TYPE=Bios&pMAIN_TYPE=Motherboard&pTITLE_ON_SCREEN=BX133-RAID&pSOCKET_TYPE=Socket%20370

Also, on this forum there's an excerpt from someone who's had communication from Abit re: coppermine-T support (you have to scroll down, no direct link):

http://www.abxzone.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-6817.html

i'm pasting it here:

I think the PIII 1200mhz you guys are seeing is not a Tualatin but a faster PIII called the CopperMine-T.

Check this thread at anandtech:

Link (http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=28&threadid=512647)

There is a post from RichieZZZZ there and he posted:

you need to read HOCP they e-mailed abit about it.

<< There is and has been confusion about what exactly Tualatin CPUs will work in as we stated earlier. It seems as if Tualatin CPUs are not backwards compatible with BX or i815 chipsets. When I posted this earlier I got this mail from Don Goff that pointed us to this link which we had posted a month or so ago that states this, "Supports Intel Coppermine T CPU." about their BIOS upgrade for the ABIT BX133 RAID board. Admittedly I am a bit confused about this too so we asked ABIT what exactly the deal is and here is their response.

Kyle,

OK, I have it. It is the confusion about CopperMine CPU vs. CopperMine-T CPU vs. Tualatin CPU.

The CopperMine-T was the CPU that was the bridge between the CopperMine and Tualatin platforms. The CopperMine-T can work in BX boards, usually through a BIOS update.

The Tualatin CPU has a different pinout and simply will not work in a BX board. I have confirmed this with our R&D and FAE so have to believe that this time it is true.

Scott.

• Coppermine III (part 2)

I just received (12 hours ago but I just checked my email) an email from a user which says that they are blocked and quotes the 165.21.154.111 number that you reverted on the Pentium III. The blocked list does not show them as blocked however. The email also includes the section above that starts "Kyle". They also included this (as the edit they wanted to add):

• 'Coppermine-T

An intermediate Socket370 CPU produced by Intel as they shifted the Pentium III to the Tualatin core; e.g. the last pre-netburst/P4 Celerons released were Coppermine-Ts.

The Coppermine-T is a hybrid Tualatin-process chip but which is electrically/pinout similar to the older Coppermine chips and therefore can work on the older Socket370 boards (though a BIOS upgrade may be required to recognise the higher clock-multiple CPUs). While Tualatin-compatible boards are usually also backwards-compatible with older Socket370 CPUs, but the reverse is not true (Tualatin CPUs will not work on older Socket370 boards).

An example would be the old Abit BX-133 RAID mainboard, which despite being based on the venerable 440BX chipset, can support up to 1.1GHz Celeron CPUs at the official 100MHz FSB.

There has been some confusion between the Coppermine-T and the Tualatin: (from http://www.abxzone.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-6817.html, a post referencing a response from Abit staff)

• • I have no idea if this is a proper edit or not. I'll leave it up to you. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 21:02, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
    • Look at this : http://users.erols.com/chare/586.htm There's a Coppermine Celeron with 1.1 GHz as well, not only Tualatin. Coppermine-T is listed with 95mm² die size and Tualatin is 80. According to german C'T computer magazine it is definitely a Coppermine with support for Tualatin low-voltage bus system (1.25V/1.5V instead of 1.5V on standard Coppermines) http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/14782 (german). It is said the Coppermine-T is often confused with the Tualatin but it's really based on a slightly modified Coppermine design. --Denniss 22:51, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Image:A10 gun.jpg

Please remember to notify the uploader when tagging an image "no license". Thue | talk 19:28, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Mussolini/Skorzeny/Student

From Talk:Benito_Mussolini:

Sorzeny did not lead the rescue team ! The operation was planned by General Kurt Student and his staff. His Paratroopers/elite infantry did execute this operation. Skorzeny did only take only in this operation as observer.--Denniss 17:19, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Hey Denniss -- please see discussion at Talk:Benito_Mussolini#Rescue by Otto Skorzeny. Best, Xian 23:38, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi Denniss, I added some comments myself. Pls. check. Talk:Benito_Mussolini#Rescue by Otto Skorzeny. g999b

Tagging PD images as copyvios

Please see the explanation here. Thanks, --Irpen 08:05, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Gneisenau/Scharnhorst

Hi, I don't think the class name changes were meant to be vandalism, just a newbie who wanted to help. --Yooden

Image:S vs pelton schnitt 1 zoom.png

Guten Abend Denniss, ich habe bei dem Bild oben die GFDL nachgetragen, die aus einem mir nicht erkennbaren Grunde gefehlt hat. In der Diskussion zum Bild ist nochmals die Mail wieder gegeben, mit der mir Voith-Siemens die Verwendung unter der GFDL frei gegeben hat. --Markus Schweiss 18:03, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, das war das falsche Wiki. Ist mir zunächst gar nicht aufgefallen. --Markus Schweiss 18:10, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Falsche Wiki, richtiger Benutzer. Hab's schon gesehen und Dir geantwortet.--Denniss 22:45, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Vandal

Hey don't call me a vandal. Portable 22:08, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry but you are. You created a secondary account just for the River Plate battle. --Denniss 22:10, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

No. I did not. I have forgotten my password, I haven't used my account in ages. Portable 22:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm on my laptop and it doesn't have my account details. Portable

Spitfire

Brookie here - the captured Spitfire used by the Germans was not in France but over central England - have reverted your deletion. Brookie :) - a collector of little round things! 19:54, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

RAF did not use Spits in France - how should the germans capture a Spit there? Spits were preserved for home defense and not for offensive operations during this time (1940). How should it be possible for a captured Spit to fly missions over central england ? It may had better range than the 109 but not that much higher. --Denniss 21:27, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for helping to revert User:RareAviation's vandalism. They continued to restore the links and I listed them for banning. - Emt147 04:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert on the T-34 article. Nice catch. DMorpheus 16:07, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Virgin Blue 737.jpg

Greetings. I noticed you tagged Image:Virgin Blue 737.jpg as {{PD-self}}. Why do you think that the uploader owned the copyright to the image? – Quadell 18:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Image:2000 CF-18Hornet.jpg

Hi there, what's the problem with the picture? Just curious as to why it isn't allowed, please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks! Ouuplas 13:35, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Please read this copyright statement: http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/notices_e.asp . These images are far from having no usage restrictions. You should always carefully read usage restriction on thirdparty websites ! --Denniss 13:54, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Which usage restriction wasn't I abiding by? Ouuplas 14:04, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

The part with commercial reproduction ? This is a usage restriction you should't forget to mention. --Denniss 21:44, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

What does the commercial reproduction section have to do with posting the picture on Misplaced Pages though? Ouuplas 00:29, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Please read Misplaced Pages:Image use policy, non-commercial images are not accepted anymore in en wiki. And in general you can't ignore a usage restriction and stating a false free copyright status just because you don't like the restriction. --Denniss 01:07, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I didn't. I was unaware I was using the wrong usage tag. I do think deleting the image altogether is a little extreme, isn't there another tag that could be used to keep the image? (Not to mention all the other images you tagged?) I really think all those images contribute to their articles, and I'm not sure deleting them is completely necessary. I'm still not completely sure what was wrong with how I tagged the image originally. If it's alright with you, I would be interested in getting a third party to provide their opinion on the whole situation, otherwise a whole lot of great images are going to be deleted. Ouuplas 03:24, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Maybe they are usable within the fair use regulation but I'm not an expert in fair use. --Denniss 09:10, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:Granville Mall Halifax.jpg

You were pretty agressive with . You changed the tag, without offering a real explanation. If, for the sake of argument, your aggressiveness was justified, let me encourage you to remember that that people you are dealing with are other volunteers. You risk alienating them, or really pissing them off, by acting high-handedly.

Over on the commons you accused someone of a copyright violation, without offering any substantiation. I got accused of a copyright violation myself, four months ago, by a very aggressive guy. It is a very unpleasant accusation. My accuser couldn't admit he made a mistake. -- Geo Swan 23:04, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I am not very aggressive other than with copyright problems or obvious copyvios. People uploading images have to be sure there are no copyright problems with images they upload. They can't "forget" some vital parts of a license. Over at the Commons this user is uploading abviously copyvios, I remembered some of them to be of canadian forces origin because i had to tag several of these as noncommercial here. Surprisingly I found several of them over at the Commons tagged as PD-self. And an IP releted to this user tagged these noncommercial images here as copyright free use but again "forgot" the noncommercial part. --Denniss 00:07, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay, but please bear in mind that it is an ugly accusation. Very disturbing to receive, and disturbing to read. I am suggesting it is important to substantiate that kind of accusation. And, assuming good faith -- well, doesn't it require at least giving lip service to assuming the copyright breaker made a mistake? At least the first time? If you found multiple instances, shouldn't you link to them, for the sake of the innocent bystanders?

About this non-commercial issue -- frankly I am confused. I uploaded half a dozen to a dozen images from the Canadian Coast Guard site. (1) Non-commercial, (2) give credit, (3) no misrepresentation... At the time I uploaded them there seemed to be no problem with uploading those images. Is the reason the images are being removed to facilitate canning a version of the wikipedia to be distributed as part of linux distributions? If that is the only reason, why not just use the tags to not include those files when the CDs are being made? -- Geo Swan 03:08, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

AFAIK there was a change in the image usage policy, Jimbo Wales and others wanted to have less conditional use and more free images. But if there's a non-commercial restriction the uploader has to mention this in the image description. --Denniss 03:57, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of this image, you could've told me about the problem and I easily could've gotten permission. I wasn't aware there were any problems with it. Ouuplas 23:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

resistance

Wow. Some people are way more upset about losing those DFO images than I am. -- Geo Swan 06:35, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

It's the same user who uploads these copyvio images on the Commons with his IP here, he even has another sockpuppet account on the commons ... --Denniss 09:08, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Template:GR-C

I don't understand why you won't discuss your edits and why the image needs to be changed. Ardenn 02:57, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

All .png flags are replaced by .svg versions at the Commons. They render better on the server side (consuming less CPU time). They have other benefits, too. --Denniss 08:40, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Why? Please reply on my talk page. Ardenn 04:36, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

An image deletion question

After thinking about the DFO and DND images that may be deleted soon I decided to go through all the CCG images, and determine which were under free liscenses, and go looking for more free images. My notes seem to indicate that there was an image named ] that was a free image, and another image with the almost identical name ], which is noncommercial.

Now, either I made some errors, or the one my notes indicate was under a free liscense has been deleted. I'd like to get to the bottom of this. If I didn't make a mistake, then an admin deleted the wrong image. Can you tell me where I would look to see the list of removed images? If I can't find a file with the spelling I thought was from an OK image in that list I am the one who made a mistake... -- Geo Swan 06:04, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Athlon 64 3800+ Winchester?

You say there is no 3800+ Winchester, yet I own one. Using CPUZ (www.cpuid.com) , it was identified as a 90nm with 1.5v with code name Winchester.

What stepping is shown ? If it's really a Winchester then it's not a standard one. It is not listed at http://www.amdcompare.com . --Denniss 21:45, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Using CPUZ, it says stepping is 0. Any idea what this means? --Chuggwald 02:02 20 March 2006 (AEST)

Hmm, No. Try the latest version (AFAIK 1.32.1). Do you have Everest Home ? It may be able to show more Info. --Denniss 16:22, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Yup, am using latest CPUZ (1.32.1). Using Everest, it says Unknown for CPU Type, Winchester S939 for Alias, and DH-D0 for Stepping. --Chuggwald 16:09 21 March 2006 (AEST)

Image copyright

Hi, just wanted to ask a question regarding the Hawk Mk120 and SAS Drakensberg images. I just got off the phone with the person responsible for the South African Department of Defence's online presence (eg the dod.mil.za site and all those related), and established that the DOD was ok with any non-commercial use of its images, and he expressly stated that using them on Misplaced Pages was perfectly fine. Do you have any suggestions for which licence should be applied to the image for this? — Impi 12:42, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Use {{fairusein|article using this image}} (one article is enough for the template), please check other possible fair use tags according to the link given inside this template. --Denniss 16:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

I noticed that you tagged the page Image:UNKG0001.GIF.gif for speedy deletion with the reason "Duplicate of Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg --Denniss 18:00, 29 March 2006 (UTC)". However, "Duplicate of Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg --Denniss 18:00, 29 March 2006 (UTC)" is not currently one of our criteria for speedy deletion, so I have removed the speedy deletion tag. You can use one of our other deletion processes, Misplaced Pages:Images and media for deletion, if you still want the image to be deleted. Thanks! Stifle 20:40, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Leopard image

I changed the two fair-use images on Leopard tank in keeping with the fair use policy.

'If you see a fair use image and know of an alternative more free equivalent, please replace it ... The amount of copyrighted work used should be as little as possible.

We've no shortage of free images for this article, so replacing Image:Leopardpanzer.jpg seemed sensible. Hope that makes it clear... if you've no objections I'll take it off again.

Reverting is not minor

Please stop marking your reversions at Heinkel He 111 as minor edits. Please review the minor edit policy. --Xanzzibar 10:37, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Sturmtiger 4.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Sturmtiger 4.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Misplaced Pages (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Thuresson 00:31, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Pakistan International Airlines copyright violations

Thank you for your spirited comments backing up my removal of two of Youssef90s pics of PIA aircraft. He steals them from Airliners.net then (incredibly) calls them Public Domain! I very much appreciated your help. I have replied to him here. Best Wishes, - Adrian Pingstone 17:32, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

I really don't like people like him. I recently had lots of trouble with one user registering with many names at the Commons. The only purpose of these names was to upload manipulated images stolen from airliners.net (copyright notice removed). --Denniss 21:38, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:N805SY 2 small.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:N805SY 2 small.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, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. EdwinHJ | Talk 00:25, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Fw 190G data...

I removed the build numbers from the G section.

The build numbers and acceptance numbers for the Fw190G given by RLM starting in the fall of 1943 are very very innacturate. Some of it was interdepartmental propaganda to hide the true impact of American daylight and British nightime bombing, as well as the fact that rebuilds were happening a lot more frequently.

The actual estimates for the Gs was no more than 800 aircraft.

--Evil.Merlin 20:44, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello check this out

Hello I have made a request for comment on Kurt Leyman and I need people to sign the request and also to sign on the specific page

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/User_conduct

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Kurt_Leyman

(Deng 03:08, 27 April 2006 (UTC))