User talk:578/Archive 1

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Gotem, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

Welcome

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. 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! --Lst27 22:04, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the question. You can put the following: {{copyvio1}} website copyrighted from {{copyvio2}} ~~~~ Thanks. --Lst27 20:55, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The user seemed to stop after a message left on his/her talk page by Neutrality. Thanks for taking care of this! :-) --Lst27 21:20, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

If I could add something to this discussion... I notice that you marked Apollonia, antic city as a possible copyright violation, but didn't add a listing at Wikipedia:Copyright problems.

Adding a listing to WP:CP gives other editors a chance to look at the copyright problem and puts it in line for deletion if necessary after its time on WP:CP is up (I won't say it ensures action, but that's another matter). Besides, the {{copyvio}} template states that the marked article is listed at WP:CP, so we should try to be consistent with this. Please remember to add WP:CP listings when marking articles with {{copyvio}}.

Thanks. --rbrwr^± 21:51, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Rah Shirts

"Not suitable for Wickipedia" doesn't work well as a reason to speedy delete something. This one seems to be a pure ad, which I usually VfD rather than speedying -- this one of course will get voted "delete" as non-notable, but prolly needs to go through the process. (Unless some admin sees it and zaps it anyway.) --jpgordon{gab} 23:39, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• I'm pretty new too! Just started a couple months ago. Go to WP:VFD and you'll see how it works.--jpgordon{gab} 23:42, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Re: Vandal message

If your IP address is different than the IP address that the message was sent to, then my message was not directed to you. There's a bug in the MediaWiki software that directs anonymous users to the wrong IP address when the click the "you have new messages" button. Sorry for any confusion. -[[User:Frazzydee|Frazzydee|✍]] 01:29, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

No problem :). Happy editing! -[[User:Frazzydee|Frazzydee|✍]] 01:32, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Reply:

I'm not sure... Sorry. I think you can just start editing. Enjoy! --Lst27 (talk) 00:14, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Re: Civil War

578 wrote:

It looks as the two of us share a common interest in civil war battles. I am in the process of writing new articles on various civil war battles and adding content to existing articles. Judging by the amount of red links on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_the_American_Civil_War there is a lot of work to be done. If you need any help along the way I would be more the willing to help out. --578

I haven't had much of an interest in the civil war until recently. It started with editing the Battle of Hampton Roads article (which recently became a Feature Article), and I noticed that the campaignboxes for the civil war were nonexistent... so, after some work, I made all of Wikipedia:WikiProject Battles/Campaignboxes#American Civil War those, and moved on to putting battleboxes on all the existing battle page, along with public domain pictures when available. Right now, I'm working on a US map showing which counties were involved in the civil war, color coded for the theater and year of battle. This could... take some time... hehe...

As for creating new articles, I highly recommend this site. Let me know what new battle articles you create, and I can add battleboxes, find public domain photos, and properly categorize them for you. Because that site is public domain, you could, if you wanted to, just copy and paste the content from the site, with some proper rewording. --brian0918™ 17:59, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Could you list the new Battle pages as you create them, either on Talk:Battles of the American Civil War, or on my talk page? That way they won't be forgotten. --brian0918™ 18:17, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Completed the US map: Image:American Civil War Battles by Theater, Year.png

I sorta wanted to make the map clickable in some way, but can that be done on Wikipedia? --brian0918™ 18:57, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Brian0918 wrote: FYI: According to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Battles, when you put the names of the commanders in the battlebox, you don't include their ranks. They say to put those in the main text only. Nice job on the articles you've created so far. --brian0918™ 21:59, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Ok my bad will take that into account in the future. Just to give you a heads up i am currenlty working on Battle of Fort Blakely which might be the my first civil war battle to include a troop movements map. 578 02:54, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I get most of my battlebox pictures from the Library of Congress. You should only get them if they offer a full-size TIFF file. Download that (if you don't have a fast connection, forget about it), resize it and lower the color count (in Paintshop Pro or Photoshop). You can also check the National Archives or the New York Public Library. For maps, I'd check David Rumsey Map Collection. In any case, the best thing to do is download the largest file possible, resize it to something less than 1MB when possible, and make sure to save it as something lossless, like PNG (not JPG, it is really lossy). If you'd rather I did it, that's fine. --brian0918™ 03:05, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Civil War battle map

That is one very cool map - thanks for creating it. unfortunately, I dont know how to do what you want. My suggestion is to try the village pump. Neutrality^talk 22:16, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

No problem. I don't really think something clickable like that is possible on Wikipedia, but I'm not sure... --brian0918™ 22:24, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Civil War Battles General

In order to be a tad more organazied under this heading will go general questions, comments, dusccions. Please however create a heading with in this heading when a new topic is started.

Battle of Fort Blakely

For battleboxes, you only need to put the name of the war in the conflict field. For the campaign, you get the exact name from the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Battles/Campaignboxes#American Civil War. So, for Fort Blakely, the two lines in the battlebox should look like:

| conflict=[[American Civil War]]
| campaign=Mobile Campaign

578 wrote:

The Battle of Fort Blakely officaly took place over 8 days (april 2-9) however the main attack, and only real attack, on Fort Blakely was on April 9. The total amount of Casualties listed is 4,475 but [this site (http://www2.cr.nps.gov/abpp/battles/al006.htm%7C)] inculdes the casualties resulting from the main attack on April 9. In the battle box i only put these cassulites(the ones from april 9, mainly becuase that was the only real attack). But my question is, is there any way that it could be possible to list the total Casualties number (4,475) with in the battle box. bakuzjw (aka 578) 20:52, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC) This entry was edited to fix spelling and the link bakuzjw (aka 578) 20:55, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

For the number of casualties, I would put in the battlebox:

| casualties1= 4,475 total (US and CS)<br>629 on April 9
| casualties2= 4,475 total (US and CS)<br>2,900 on April 9

This provides the most information (although a little repetitive, nothing will be confused). --brian0918&#153; 21:00, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Also, the size of the image in the battlebox should be 300px. Good job on finding that image. --brian0918&#153; 21:15, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Civil War Battles Pictures

Under this heading will go anything regarding pictures / maps.

Fort Blakely map

This image might help you with your Fort Blakely article. --brian0918&#153; 06:22, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

578 wrote:

Thanks a lot for that picture That was the same one tht i was going to ask for you get get. 578 16:01, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Gotem(speech)

Re. your question. Normally the person nominating doesn't put a "keep" or "delete" in their comment. I guess it is assumed that they are voting to delete. --LeeHunter 01:10, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're referring to. My note on the vfd page was not directed to you, it was directed to the author of the article who had tried to make a vote (you can tell it's the same person from the history page) --LeeHunter 01:26, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Speedy Delete

I'm not sure to what you are referring, I have not asked for anything to be deleted from anyones userspace to my knowledge. Rje 01:58, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

I've checked my history, I have only made two edits to user area articles which are not my own. However, both of these are userpages which were initially listed in the mainspace about a month ago and moved into the userspace after I had listed them for deletion. Rje 02:18, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

It's ok, we all make mistakes. Happy editing. Rje 03:07, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

Michael Thorne

578 wrote

the below text is copyed from what i wrote on [[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Michael_Thorne)]:

Your message is quite inappropriate in my mind, and is rather childish. Not only does your message have a mocking tone through out but it also reeks of elitism. While the content of the article may be in doubt, i see no point in having such negative and condescending message. From the looks of your homepage you are a veteran user, so i would think that you of all people would know how to best approach Vfd's but judging from your above message I guess I am mistaken. bakuzjw (aka 578) 01:19, 29 Jan 2005 bakuzjw (aka 578) 01:45, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

My comments were aimed at the claque on Wikipedia who feel that anything every written should be kept regardless of notability. Michael Thorne does not meet the criteria of notability required of an encyclopedia article. RickK 05:15, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)

578 wrote

That i understand, and i agree with (i am changing my vote to neutral) but i just thought the tone of the message was a bit harsh that’s all. I couldn’t agree more that certain articles shouldn’t be on wikipedia, I just think the tone of the messages should be as neutral as possible, that’s all. P.S. in regards to the gotem(speech) vfd, none of the votes are sock puppets but most of the keep votes were from new users that singed up just to vote to keep the article, in hindsight i should have stopped it (seeing that most of the votes to keep are from friends of mine)but, hindsight is 20/20 eh. bakuzjw (aka 578) 17:41, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Gotem on user page

Sorry, I didn't see your question--buried in the globs of discussion that followed.

The answer is yes, you can put this material on your user page. That would be a very appropriate thing to do.

Within very broad limits you can do what you like on your own user page. And, incidentally, user pages are indexed by Google, so a Google search on Gotem will pick it up.

The only rules about user pages are that you can't use them for wildly antisocial behavior, you can't use them for activities that are clearly utterly unrelated to Wikipedia (like the teaching assistant who was scheduling the use of a lab by having students edit a signup calendar on his user page), and you can't use Wikipedia as a "free web host" (megabytes of storage, hundreds of pages, etc.) If you put Gotem on your user page, my judgement is that it is almost unthinkable that anybody would try to delete it. And if they did nominate it on VfD they'd get a solid string of Keep votes and a lot of nasty remarks.

Re sockpuppets. RickK's remarks tend to be on the curt side. What he should have said in reference to sockpuppetry is that 1) it is extremely difficult to prove or disprove sockpuppetry; 2) VfD discussions are acted on by sysops who use their judgement to determine whether there is rough consensus. It is not a mechanical vote count. 3) It is the near-universal practice of sysops to discount votes from users who are "anonymous" or "not logged in", and also to discount votes from accounts created after the start of the VfD discussion, particularly if these accounts have made almost no edits except to the VfD page. The universal assumption is that it is almost unthinkably unlikely that a new user would happen to stumble on VfD within their first day or two of editing. Sockpuppetry is also judged on the basis of language style, and in some cases people with "developer" levels of access will be called on to see whether multiple accounts are using the same IP address. None of this constitutes proof, but it is a waste of time to argue with Wikipedians about it. A valid vote or two may occasionally be thrown out, but a good article should get enough keep votes for it not to matter. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:33, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Langmuir

With regard to your remark on your user page: Go for it! I just noticed that the article on him doesn't even mention Langmuir circulation.

Not quite sure how you should handle those letters with regard to sourcing and our policy against original research. If the letters have not been published, they would be subject to copyright. Would you or someone in your family be in a position to release portions of them under GFDL? Probably the best thing to do would be to release them under GFDL, put them in Wikisource, and reference them in the article. Dpbsmith (talk) 13:57, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I am not a lawyer. You may want to talk to an intellectual property lawyer about this, and although they charge several hundred dollars an hour, you can usually call one up for an initial consultation for free, and if in fact you don't really need legal advice they'll tell you that you don't. (Of course you should say "I won't get billed for this conversation, will I?")

I want to be very careful about what I say, this is just the very roughest background. Unpublished letters are a kind of "intellectual property." They can be copyrighted, and under current law I think they are automatically copyrighted. The copyright begins when they are published. Intellectual property, like other property, may or may not have much value. An unpublished song by John Lennon is probably worth a lot of money. An unpublished letter by my mother probably is worth nothing. I'm speaking here of just of the value of the words or music on the paper, not the value of the paper itself as an autograph or whatever.

Licensing something under the GFDL is almost the same as giving it away for nothing.

So, there are two questions you need to ask. a) Do I want to give away this intellectual property, these words written by Irving Langmuir? b) Does this intellectual property belong to me (because if it doesn't, it isn't mine to give away). The answer to (b) depends on whether there are any other relatives who are alive who might think that they have some kind of claim on those letters. If there are, you could have the awkward situation in which you give away the rights to the letters, and then some relative pops up and believes the letters have some value and that you gave away "their" property. That probably wouldn't result in any lawsuits but it could create bad feelings.

Here's another nightmare scenario. You license the letters under GFDL, you publish them online, and then five years later a publisher approaches you and says "There's a barrel of money in these letters, I'd like to publish them in book form." You say, "OK, but you should know they're already online under GFDL." The publisher says "Whoa! If someone can get them for free, why would they pay money for a book? The deal's off."

OK. The reason for all that is to explain that you need to be sure you want to license these letters under the GFDL or some other kind of public license.

Now, from the Wikipedia point of view. Let's say you want to put an interesting fact in the article that is backed up by something in one of his letters. Let's say Langmuir's favorite color was blue. You could just write that in the article, but someone might say "How do you know that?" and delete it. You could say "On April 1st, 1922 he wrote in a letter 'I love looking at the sky and the ocean because my favorite color is blue.'" Then in References you could say "Unpublished letter, owned by [your name], Irving Langmuir to Marion, April 1st 1922." That would probably work, and you wouldn't have given anything away. Some people might still complain, but... tough. From a scholarly point of view, for it to be a good reference you need to give some well-defined way in which someone could contact you to ask questions about the reference.

The best thing you could do for Wikipedia, but not necessarily for yourself, is to publish the letters in the WIkisource project under GFDL... and then you could reference them from the article. What I'm trying to be clear on is what's best for Wikipedia isn't necessarily what's best for you.

If you are absolutely certain that you do not mind giving away the text in these letters and don't really care what happens to them after they are online, and that there is no relative of yours who could possibly care, then you might want to go ahead and publish them in Wikisource under GFDL.

As to how you do that, it's easy. You might want to consult User:JamesDay about the proper form of the notice, but basically you just need to attach a notice to the text saying something like Copyright ©2005 by [your name], and released by [your name] under the terms of the GFDL license.

All this is just to get you started thinking about this. You don't need to do anything at all until you are at the point where you want to add a fact to the Langmuir article which is in the letters and nowhere else.

Again, I am not a lawyer, and you should take everything I have said with a big grain of salt. Dpbsmith (talk) 02:06, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Gotem Caughtem Shotem Wroughtem Besoughtem Toldem Caughtem Gotem

Dont you not want to be no zombie?

Gotem(speech)

You ask:

But would it be wrong if I put a redirect on the gotem(speech) page to my homepage, or if i left a note that the entry on gotem(speech) can be found on my homepage.

I'm assuming you're asking "Could I create a new article under the name Gotem(speech) that consisted of a note, or a redirect to my user page?"

This is against the rules as I understand them, and I don't think you should try it.

Gotem(speech) was deleted on the basis of being an unencyclopedic topic. If a longish article is unencyclopedic, a note or a redirect on the same topic is still unencyclopedic. It's not a question of how many lines of text the article had.

Creating a redirect would certainly go against the spirit of that decision. You lost, the Wikipedia community pretty much disagrees with you, and I don't think you should try to fight it.

Re-creating an article that has been voted for deletion is cause for "speedy deletion" (any sysop just deletes the article without even calling for a vote). In the short run, if you created the redirect or the note it would just get speedy deleted. If you kept recreating it you'd start getting notes telling you stop. Eventually you might blocked for "vandalism." You wouldn't really "get into trouble," by the way--that is, nothing that would affect you in the real world (outside Wikipedia).

Look, don't worry about it. It was a marginal article, there was a debate, you lost, the article was deleted. It stings. Shake it off. Nobody cares that much about it. Nobody is angry about the article's having been created. It's just like a rejection notice from a magazine, except that in Wikipedia we reject things after they are published, rather than before. Dpbsmith (talk) 02:27, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Weve got trouble german. Gotem page is under seige. They claim its a non notable town. Help! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gotem --The Raven 22:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Violation of WP:3RR

I've blocked you as well as the anonymous IP for 24 hours because of violation of the 3 revert rule. In the future if you disagree with an addition that isn't purely vandalism I urge you to consult others. If other people think the additions shouldn't be in the article, they can revert as well, and as the IP goes over the 3 limit they will be blocked. CryptoDerk 01:06, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)

Perpendicular Universes

You forgot one step: you have to add {{Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Perpendicular Universes}} to Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Log/2005 February 9. It's a bit complicated to get all the steps right. I added it just now. -- Curps 03:02, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Delete categories

The categories can be deleted. However, you have to be an administrator in order to delete categories. I assume you're not an administrator, so I suggest you contact an administrator about this and ask him/her to delete these categories. Thanks. --Lst27 (talk) 23:17, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Adminship

If you feel I am deserving, I'd like to ask you to support my adminship at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Brian0918. Thanks. --brian0918&#153; 19:01, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Victory categories

I like that idea. So, there would be a "Category:Union victories during the American Civil War", and "Category:Confederate victories during the American Civil War", or something like that, but what would you call the battles where nobody won? Could it just be "Category:Inconclusive battles of the American Civil War"?? Lemme know, and I'll get to work on it once I'm done with other stuff. -- BRIAN0918  22:10, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Eli Whitney

Thanks. This kid has already been warned and mentioned on the vandal in progress page. He has been writing racist stuff on the Jethro Tull page constantly. He is relentless. -Deadcorpse 19:49, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

um

what is going on

what now

UM I was about to say that I so totally KNOW what is going on, but (and I say this sheepishly) what is all that stuff up there?

ACW Victory categories

No disrespect intended, and I admire bursts of concentrated, quality work like this, but what is the actual point of all this categorization? Do you have a "use case" [to use a computer science term] that indicates who would actually want to see a list of battles--some significant, most obscure--sorted by victor? I have never seen such a list in any of the Civil War books I've read. Sometimes it seems like people are trying to turn an encyclopedia into a relational database, with all these categories, battle boxes, succession tables, etc. Anyway, I certainly don't object, but wonder what the motivation was. Hal Jespersen 00:20, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

A while back I passed the idea past brian0918 and we both seemed to think that it would be a good idea. There is no real case study; I just thought that it would be interesting to look at the victories in chronological order (which I plan to do after I have all of the battles tagged). The real motivation was that, as you mentioned, I haven’t seen a list like that in any book I have come across and I just thought it would be an interesting to look at. Another reason was that it gave me something to do last night. On another note, I noticed that the format of each article varied greatly (some were divided up into different sections, others were just one paragraph ect.) I was wondering if there is any standard "look" that a ACW battle article should have. One thing that I did notice was that there is still a ton of work that needs to be done to the articles. I think a first goal should be to have some sort of text on each battle listed. (I finally have time to edit wikipeida now that all my exams are over). 578 (Yes?) 18:03, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

The process of dumping in the National Park Service battle descriptions and then creating those battle boxes is something I have been leaving to others who are more interested in the mechanics of the articles than the history involved. I have been trying to concentrate on creating or enhancing articles so that they are interesting and have the appropriate context for understanding them; those NPS descriptions are sometimes quite terse. I also find the entire category system that divides battles into somewhat obscurely named campaigns to be less than user-friendly, so I have been writing campaign overviews, such as the Gettysburg Campaign, the Franklin-Nashville Campaign, etc. I have also been spending a lot of time writing biographies of Civil War generals. So anyway, as I said, I don't object to these victory categories, but just wondered. Hal Jespersen 20:58, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Thats nice, now go screw your self

Wow that amazing, but i dont care for vandals, so why dont you do me a forvor and fuck off. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 03:07, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Listen

I think that adding the quote sort of lets the reader know how the actual creator of star wars feels about that catastophe of a movie. Adding the quote gives context of the movie,

Hello

I didn't change the template; I just made a new one. Template:Infobox ethnic group = new, Template:Ethnic group = still used.

you're welcome

No problem! Happy editing, Antandrus (talk) 23:17, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

VfD

When you add a VfD label to an article, you need to fill in the entry properly. Refer to WP:VFD for more info. Also, the VfD needs to be listed under the date that the notice was posted. Harro5 23:19, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

Gladstone

I notice you reverted the removal of the statement that Gladstone was a non-conformist. Please don't do this again - Gladstone was a high-church Anglican, and it's rather embarrassing for Wikipedia that it's been displaying the wrong information since December 2001 ! Regards, Arwel 20:53, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Jimbo Wales at UF -- next week

Hi 578/Archive 1! I noticed on your userpage that you live in Gainesville. I wanted to let you know about an event going on at UF next week: Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia, is coming to speak!

The speech is on Wednesday, April 12 at 7 pm at Emerson Alumni Hall (1938 W. University Ave.). The speech is free and open to the public.

Jimbo's keynote will be on the role of free culture in universities. The keynote will be followed by a discussion panel of UF students and faculty. It's sponsored by Florida Free Culture, ACCENT, and the Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation.

For more information, visit this page or email me. Hope to see you here!

(P.S. Because not everyone checks their userpage regularly, I'll also email you this note if your account is set up to allow e-mails from other users.) --Tetraminoe 05:54, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Vandal

Please stop vandalizing the game tester article. — Frecklefoot | Talk 13:47, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Request for Investigation

I have filed an RfI for you Wikipedia:Requests_for_investigation#New_requests, following the placement of the vandal warning on my user talk page. Fram 12:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Please do not vandalise articles [1], userpages [2], do not leave inappropriate warnings [3], do not make personal attacks [4] [5], and if you have solid evidence of use sockpuppets [6] request a checkuser. As you are accusing other of sockpuppetry be sure not to be involved in it yourself [7]. Consider this your final warning to stop editing in this manner or you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Petros471 20:59, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Please do not remove warnings from your talk page: this is vandalism. Thanks, Gwernol 22:58, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry but you do now own your talk page and you may not remove legitimate warnings from here. If you do so again you will be blocked from editing. Thanks, Gwernol 23:01, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Archiving your talk page would be fine. Gwernol 23:05, 21 June 2006 (UTC)