User talk:Amberrock/Archive 2

The following discussion is an archived talkpage of Amberrock below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on Amberrock's live user talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.

I understand it perfectly well. However it says nothing about every piece of information having to have a refrence every two lines. Thus i remove them on that basis. If needs be, include them in the notes section. Thats what it is there for. Leyasu 12:29, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Like i said, use the note section, thats what it is there for. Leyasu 14:12, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Find a format that works for the refernces, as [1]. [2], [3] in the middle of sentences looks fucking awfull. Use the Notes section until a better format is found for reference markers. Leyasu 14:25, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I tried a rewrite (the article is way shorter and probably better). Let me know what you think. Jim62sch 12:56, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Some of the alleged history was a bit odd, too. I've read biographies on Hendrix and the Who and I don't remember any mention of Golden Earring members being offered jobs. And given that I love music (and play both guitar and bass pretty well) I'd think I'd remember that link. Of course, I could be wrong. Jim62sch 13:08, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SoothingR, now that I'm an administrator, I just wanted to thank you for your support on my RfA. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:29, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, man... you should have given me a nudge before sending Nightwish to WP:FAC. :) Anyway, I have rewritten the article in a prose which (I hope) has improved it at least by a bit. It was a tough job, but hey, consider it as a New Year's gift, in case that makes any sense to you. :P Long live heavy metal! Best regards, --Sn0wflake 21:21, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

PS: You might want to contact the editors who voted oppose, and ask for them to read the new version of the article. --Sn0wflake 21:32, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings SoothingR, I wish to offer my gratitude for supporting me on my recent nomination for adminship, which passed with the final tally of 65/4/3. If you would ever desire my assistance in anything, or wish to give me feedback on any actions I take, feel free to let me know. Cheers! Elle vécut heureusement toujours dorénavant (Be eudaimonic!) 09:43, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, when removing failed COTW nominations, be sure to archive them at Wikipedia:Collaboration of the week/Removed. Thanks, Talrias (t | e | c) 15:40, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes thanks for your suggestion - I shall do that for sure. And, I also convey my New Year greetings to you. --Bhadani 17:08, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Tim please see my above comments. Yesterday I thought over the matter as regards the issues raised by you, and analyzed my edits. I found that I have been generally using preview before saving. I understand that the concept of preview is applicable edit-wise, and each edit should be preferably previewed. Thus, there may be repeated edits by the same user of the same page, which may appear to create "clutter" in the history – but actually it is indicative of the activities on that particular page as also edits to that particular page by that particular user. In my opinion, the edits are not quantifiable: I mean to say that no one should expect that a user shall do edit to a particular page only once in a day or so on: thus if one is making massive additions to contents, and endeavoring to improve the contents, he/she will have to repeatedly do edits, of course use of preview is implied.

I may add that at times I have created pages with several paragraphs in one go Sri Padmanabhaswamy temple and Indian rope trick – but it is not always possible. In case, you find examples of creating a page of several paragraphs by other fellow editors, please inform me: I would surely like to inter-act with him/her to hone my editing skills.

As regards your point about cluttering the recent changes by repeated edits, I think that activities by editors, unless they are known vandals, should not be termed as “clutter” as activities on the recent changes are indicative of aggregate edits, and more edits add more value to “the sum total of human knowledge” for which we are striving. I may give an example: 100 edits by a single user to a single page, or 100 edits by 100 different users to the same page, have the same "net effect" of "clutter" on the page's history and the recent changes. The environment here is dynamic - not like a printed page, and one has to get used to this environment - faster the better.

Having clarified my position, I appreciate the spirit of your suggestion, and express my thanks to you. I also assure you that I shall surely continue to use preview. Regards. --Bhadani 14:11, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SoothingR, I see on your user page that you help ppl out with putting the correct license on pictures. Would you please help with Image:Leda_Cosmides.jpg? The picture is from Cosmides' university website & I got her permission (via email) to use it... What is the correct license then? Thanks, Mikkerpikker 11:02, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! And wow... that was quick! I'm impressed... Mikkerpikker 11:19, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reminder. Can you please refresh my memory about the article which apparently I did not preview? --Ancheta Wis 12:33, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I used Preview on each of the cited edits. Thanks for your concerns. I have a post into Village Pump to assess the cost of saving a change to a Section, which occurred in all but one of my changes. It is my belief that a Save of a section is less costly than a save of the entire article, but that is what my post is asking on VP. You should also know that I was augmenting most of those stub micro-sections with images, for which it is always prudent to save incrementally. It is possible that it is cheaper to save an entire article at one Click, but I do not yet know if that truly is the case. It depends on the block size of the database writes, which I do not yet know. Now, I admit that some of the changes to the article came as afterthoughts, such as the citations, which are always involved things involving research. But I believe that the edit history will reveal that my edits in the main consist of considered changes; after all, I did use Preview, for the changes to the former COTW. --Ancheta Wis 14:35, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent message: yes, Tim, I agree with you. I would also like to place on record an appreciation for your concern. I am sure that such inter-action makes we the wikipedians a vibrant community. You see, in my last message to you, I made a msitake (smiles), so you are perfectly right. --Bhadani 17:57, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why shouldn't {{Cotw2}} and {{Cotw3}} be used in the Template:CurrentCOTWS? Doesn't it make it so that the template never has to be updated, and it relies solely on Cotw1, Cotw2, and Cotw3? Please reply on my talk page, under the section you created called COTWs. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 22:11, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I saw your edit summary here when you reverted my edits; that's why I asked. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 19:33, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting the Q-Mack article pass. Sorry to get back to you so late... heh... happy holidays to you! -Brownsc

Thanks for helpful comment on Melungeon. May I ask how one does inline notes and what they are? I've always used external links in my articles. Do you mean footnotes? Badagnani 12:06, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the clarification. I dislike these notes very much, because they take you to the bottom of the article each time. Personally I don't see how the numerical links in the text can be seen as intrusive, as Wikipedia has its own styles that are different from those in print journals. Just my thoughts. Badagnani 12:37, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks--may I post your comments about the notes on the Talk page of Melungeons for the editors' benefit? Badagnani 13:08, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You removed a great deal of entries with this edit and I was wondering why. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 19:42, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem, you're certainly not the first person to make that kind of mistake. :) Let me know if you need any help fixing it. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 19:26, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be willing to support my nominee for WP:COTW. The article is Invasion which is an important term for military knowledge. The current article however isn't at the same standard as the term is in modern and historic warfare though. If you'll be willing to support, I'll be greatful. Thanks RENTASTRAWBERRY ^{FOR LET?} röck 00:46, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there—Thx for your note, and sorry to have been tardy to respond. I'll have a look now. Tony 04:15, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First: the link to the videogame page, which I also linked in the article itself: www.winterheartsguild.com Second: a topic in the official Sonata Arctica forum. This was stickied by the website owner which IMO is proof it's not a hoax. Also the website of the game shows a business meeting between the game makers and Sonata Arctica band. http://www.sonataarctica.info/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2184 Sneltrekker 12:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the beard compliment ;) No problem about the asking for evidence. Perhaps I should have put it up in the Sonata Arctica discussion area also. Sneltrekker 13:09, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pgk's RFA

---

Thanks for your support on my request for adminship.

The final outcome was (80/3/0), so I am now an administrator. I was flattered by the level of support and the comments, so I'm under real pressure not to disappoint, thus if you have any queries, suggestions or problems with any of my actions as an admin then please leave me a note --pgk^(talk) 10:41, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say thanks for the welcome, however late it came and however late my reply is :P - Grundlegod 03:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I notice that you flagged this image as public domain. I don't quite understand why it qualifies for that status. Could you explain on Image talk:Bcprayer.jpg? Thanks. Doops | talk 05:03, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And welcome to you too! After all, I've become a member of the English Wikipedia a year before you have! ;)

Bedankt dat u me welkom heet! En ook welkom aan u. Ik zat stiekempjes al een jaar langer aan de Engelse Wikipedia te werken dan u, maar ja wel een stuk minder. ;) Dinsdagskind 22:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for supporting me in my RFA. --TimPope 13:55, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the notice. I have blocked the IP address for the duration of the school day. —Theo (Talk) 18:27, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SoothingR. I noticed that you removed the Spoken Wikipedia template from the Nightwish article some time ago with no explanation, and marked it as a minor edit. I was curious as to why you did so. Please let me know on my talk page, thanks! ~MDD4696 02:46, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I'd be more than happy to do so. As you might have noticed, Nightwish became a featured article. In its RFA, one person commented:

• Comment. The "listen to this article" box is a little overt. I took a look at the bottom of the article but that is quite busy, any ideas? --Oldak Quill 13:18, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And my reply was:

• The file is heavily outdated anyway. I'll just remove the template and list it at the talkpage instead, through use of {{Talk Spoken Wikipedia}} SoothingR 13:36, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I hope that this information about the removal of the spoken wikipedia box is sufficient to you.SoothingR 13:16, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your quick reply. I don't believe that the spoken articles should be removed because they are outdated, since they probably won't be recorded very often. I'd prefer to see an outdated recording that not to know there was one at all. Perhaps this would be a good topic of discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia? As for the spoken box itself, I'm not sure what it looked like at the time, but it looks fine to me where it is now. There's actually a discussion about the template placement going on right now, if you have any comments. ~MDD4696 22:01, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You should vote as you think best, of course. But I think you may have misunderstood a narrow factual thing. Jossi, the nominator, noted that I had made 1400 edits in the Wikipedia namespace. I made quite a few more in the article namespace, about 7300 between all areas. There's a report from Kate's edit counter in the answers section. So take that for whatever you feel it's worth. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 21:21, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... can I urge you to reconsider further. The edit Starblind points out was indeed asnine by me. But it was nine months ago, and even then I rolled it back after 3 minutes. Starblind has some other reasons he's opposing my RfA nomination that aren't stated on the page, but surely given that more than 95% of my edits have been since then, the one early, and brief, mistake shouldn't be definitive. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 17:09, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Soothing. If you'd like to get together some time for some intercourse, I think that'd be great for both of us. Contact me to arrange and time and place to meet. I like public parks, but maybe you prefer something different. Whatever your pleasure is fine by me. Let's fuck!

By the way, you're doing a bang up job on here; it's users like you that make Wikipedia such a valuable tool. Congrats on your fine work. —the preceding unsigned comment is by 64.139.74.30 (talk • contribs) 15:01, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I think you might have edited the wrong page on your comment about that anon IP... (User_talk:Nippoo]) :) Nippoo 16:39, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Bus.gif. 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 Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia'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 on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia: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. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. --OrphanBot 07:34, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and delete, thanks, --Danteferno 21:19, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, come to think of it, do you really this is a fitting tag? The JPG is an official band promotional photo, which is no different than the uptenth other promotional photos used for band articles. --Danteferno 21:32, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am 81.174.172.103, 81.174.172.103 is my ip address, i removed that stuff cause i didn't really want it there. but thank you for looking out for me, althoguh that was a false alarm :D

oops sorry, lol i did it again, i always forget to log in

anyway i am 81.174.172.103, thats my ip, i just fogot to log in.

DeborahH 14:49, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please accept my embarrassingly belated thank you for supporting my RfA, which much to my surprise passed 102/1/1, earning me minor notoriety. I am grateful for all the supportive comments, and have already started doing the things poeple wanted me to be able to do. And hopefully nothing else... Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 12:01, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I did that on babylon talk. I'm 147.210.200.250 when I'm in universty (and not loggued), otherwise I'm Yug, I did this cleaning to improve, look what I did (see older versions), look why, and I think that will be ok. Bye 147.210.200.250 14:58, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again SoothingR & sorry to bother u... I've looked and looked but I simpy can't seem to find the right copyright notice for Image:Leucadendron_argenteum.jpeg. According to the copyright notice on the website it's from [1], "Material from this site may be used in other media for non - commercial purposes, provided that SANBI is acknowledged by the name South African National Biodiversity Institute, South Africa." So it is clear wikipedia can use the image but I don't know under which licence... Any help / advice would be much appreciated. Mikkerpikker ... 23:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rajab 10:29, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry... I have no idea what your on about :S I'm kinda new at this.. any help would be appreciated..

Josh...— Preceding unsigned comment added by The Pace (talk • contribs) 14:02, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bummer... Oh Well, as it would seem i can't Copy and paste it into my UserPage for some reason.. Prehaps its a sign to not setup a wikipedia account >.<

Anyway, Thansk for your help..

One last thing though. Could you please, If at all possible, try to copy and paste my current information into my userpage? I think I may have a problem with my browser...

Josh— Preceding unsigned comment added by The Pace (talk • contribs) 14:16, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even though i almost dispise you for putting me up for deletion (Joke) I must thank you for your speedy help in the last few miniutes.. Hope to see you around..

Pace... Also, I apologise for the mess I made of your messages...— Preceding unsigned comment added by The Pace (talk • contribs) 14:24, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. I'll put it on my quickie templates list. I forget, was it on the "How to close a deletion debate" page? I believe it wasn't, but I honestly don't remember. Oh well, thanks for your help, I will user it in the future. Karmafist 15:45, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.