User talk:Oknazevad/Archive 1
This is an archive, please do not modify.
Oops, didn't mean to do that. Damn IE, that's why I switched to Firefox.
Striking your voteEdit
Thank you for your interest in the Wikimedia Board Election. The Election Committee regretfully informs you that your previous vote was received in error and will be struck according to the election rules, described below.
The Election Committee regretfully announces today that we will have to remove approximately 220 votes submitted. These votes were cast by people not entitled to vote. The election rules state that users must have at least 400 edits by June 1 to be eligible to vote.
The voter lists we sent to Software in the Public Interest (our third party election partner) initially were wrong, and one of your account was eventually included to our initial list. There was a bug in the edit counting program and the sent list contained every account with 201 or more edits, instead of 400 or more edits. So large numbers of people were qualified according to the software who shouldn't be. The bug has been fixed and an amended list was sent to SPI already.
Our first (and wrong) list contains 80,458 accounts as qualified. The proper number of qualified voters in the SPI list is now 52,750. As of the morning of July 4 (UTC), there are 2,773 unique voters and 220 people, including you, have voted who are not qualified based upon this identified error.
In accordance with voting regulations the Election Committee will strike those approximately 220 votes due to lack of voting eligibility. The list of struck votes is available at https://wikimedia.spi-inc.org/index.php/List_of_struck_votes.
We are aware of the possibility that some of the people affected may have other accounts with more than 400 edits, and hence may still be eligible to vote. We encourage you to consider voting again from another account, if you have one. If you have no other account eligible to vote, we hope you reach the criteria in the next Election, and expect to see your participation to the future Elections.
Your comments, questions or messages to the Committee would be appreciated, you can make them at m:Talk:Board elections/2007/en. Other language versions are available at m:Translation requests/Eleccom mail, 07-05.
Again, we would like to deeply apologize for any inconvenience.
For Wikimedia Board Election Steering Committee
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:03-West.gifEdit
Thanks for uploading Image:03-West.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:02, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
You had previously participated in a discussion about the naming of these articles. It's being discussed again at Talk:Park Avenue Tunnel if you'd like to comment. DMacks (talk) 05:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content, as you did to Low-grade. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. --Allen3 talk 10:24, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
You reverted the change that added the NLL/MLL teams, with the explanation "NLL and MLL are not major, as explained in Major professional sports leagues of the United States and Canada". This makes no sense, since the article you referenced says "Major professional sports league, or simply major league, is the term used in Canada and the United States to refer to the highest professional division in any team sport" which is true for both the NLL and MLL. The article also says "Other major leagues include... the National Lacrosse League (NLL), Major League Lacrosse (MLL), ...".
Thanks for your addition to Khan. As the character does not seem to be known by that name alone, it does not belong on a Wikipedia:Disambiguation page. I therefore moved your addition to the page Khan (name). Happy editing, Fayenatic (talk) 17:31, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
your recent edit to TurbolinerEdit
On [this edit] you moved 2 links to the "See also" section. You also broke both links, by just using the link text, instead of also including the names of their target articles. Its a United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) Turbotrain (not United Arab Emirates, UAE), and the other article is JetTrain, not Bombardier jet train. Please proof read the article (by previewing it), before you save your edits, and, if necessary, proof read again, and re-edit after saving. Leaving your mess for others to fix is impolite. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 17:25, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry about that. This is why I shouldn't edit on my iPhone, the auto-correct feature can be quite dense, and replace perfectly, correctly typed text with blatantly incorrect "corrections." The UAC/UAE swap was an example of that, as I had indeed typed-in UAC. I should turn it off when editing.oknazevad (talk) 17:32, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
As an established editor of the article Mole (animal), your input is solicited on the Talk page to help resolve an ongoing dispute as to the nature and scope of the article. Chrisrus (talk) 18:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
NowCommons: File:United States and America.jpgEdit
File:United States and America.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:United States and America.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:United States and America.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 17:32, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Virginia Railway ExpressEdit
Appreciate your attention, but MARC still refers to itself as Maryland Area Regional Commuter, so there's no need to change that - http://www.mtamaryland.com/services/marc/serviceInformation/MARC_General_Information.cfm. JoeTransit (talk) 14:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't disagree with removing that paragraph on New England. For the record, I didn't add it, I just pointed out that among New England towns, some still do not have a manager. I have a few points though that should be considered in any changes:
- It is unusual concept to New Englanders to find out that counties outside of the area have powerful governments, and that all land is not part of an incorporated town or city.
- The reverse is also true. A New England town (check the link) would be a legal city elsewhere, but there is no unincorporated/county land in most of New England. The US Census Department has so much trouble with us that a special New England city and town area has been created to describe demographics.
- That cities elsewhere in the country can be comparitively small by population by New England standards.
- Googling for Town Manager seems to bring up mostly hits for New England towns.
- I think that the US history section can borrow from the City Commission article such that it says that Council-Manager is seen as an improvement on the latter. Then we can say that smaller municipalities may still use the City Commission style government under various names.
- Related, that "under 12,000 people" comment should go. That's covered by saying smaller communities may still use city commission, which is supported by only one sizable city in the country still using it.
- We should probably change the reference to city manager to "city or town manager" and if necessary qualify with Town Manager is most common in New England, where New England towns are essentially city governments.
Whoops! Forgot to sign and check my links
- You know, I'm actually wrong on part of this it looks. A city commission and a New England Board of Selectmen are superficially similar but probably differ in important ways. It looks to me like it is common for a City Commissioner to be in charge of a particular department, whereas Selectmen don't seem (at least according to the article and browsing the sites of at least one local town) to exercise that power, or be put in charge of a specific department. In other words, edit away because I don't know what I'm talking about :-) CSZero (talk) 18:24, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
- I'm obsessing over this now. The New England model is really more like the Weak Mayor model in the Mayor-Council system it sounds. So, let's remove the paragraph on New England and the bit about 12,000 residents as a minimum. The mayor-council article says weak mayor is nationally most common in smaller towns, not city commission. We can do what I mentioned about saying "city or town manager" and say that manager-council is an improvement over city commission, and really, mayor-council as well because it makes the executive nonpolitical (in theory). Then, we bring a link to board of selectmen into Mayor-council as one already exists in manager-council. How's this? I'm done arguing with myself on your page now :-) CSZero (talk) 18:38, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Re: United Football League (2009) team pagesEdit
I commend you for improving the United Football League team pages, as Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. However, I fail to see how the United States Patent and Trademark Office counts as "original research"-unless the editor works for the department or the ObamaNation edits Wikipedia, I fail to see its difference from other sources. Kudos for your edits, but I just wanted to clear up any confusion. Also, I've changed "UFL (city)" to "(city) UFL team", as is Wikipedia naming convention. Thank you, Tom Danson (talk) 23:26, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Request for your opinionEdit
Hi. Can you join this discussion in order to offer us your thoughts? We need as many people as we can get in this, since the 4-6 participants from previous discussions on this matter was felt by some to be insufficient. It would be most appreciated. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 07:18, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
The addition that you reverted was put their for a specific purpose. There has been a dispute as to the capitalization of Second Coming, a future event. Since those listed in MOS are past events, we felt it necessary to add this specific wording. I will add it again, and please visit the talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DJ_Clayworth#Second_Coming. Add your opinion there. Thank you. R/T-รัก-ไทย (talk) 05:51, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
I can live with the last addtion, can you? I'm not so keen to county routes articles, though I've done many as a springboard for writing/linking other street articles. I think could have passed muster, actually, but I'm not so attached. Thanks for your imput/help.Djflem (talk) 15:41, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Being a Luddite I can't seem to figure how to include MTA's Train to the Game Sunday event train on the New Haven Line in the infox. It is an important aspect/development for mass transit in NY Metro. Can you help? Much appreciated.Djflem (talk) 15:55, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
What I understand is that passengers can take a one seat ride to/from Secaucus/New Haven on certain Sundays via Penn Station on NJT equipment riding on Metro North right of ways with a change of crew. It's a fact that merits mention. If one considers, as I do, that factual information, including all service information, takes priority over infoboxes or jurisdictional details (which could be included) and makes for a complete well-rounded article, ommision would do disservice to itDjflem (talk) 16:37, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
You will likely soon notice Meadowlands Rail Line. I did go ahead and do the article includeding the station infobox. Just seemed the best way to embrace all the divergent data data comprehensively and tie together what is essentailly the same story.Djflem (talk) 19:24, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Starting sentence capitalized after semicolonEdit
You write "The "The" is capitalized as the beginning of a sentence." . However, the punctuation is a semicolon, and sentences never start capitalized after a semicolon. Please check whether your logic is correct. --G.Hagedorn (talk) 19:49, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
- I think the text should remain readable. If the semicolon does not serve as a semicolon, perhaps another character like a bullet or dash might be better? Or, if full sentences are quoted inside a sentence, it might be necessary to quote them? I think the font does not help, it just highlights examples, not sentences. Nevertheless, many thanks for taking good care of manual of style, I was just a passer-by! --G.Hagedorn (talk) 21:02, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Re: Division III moveEdit
Right now, the NCAA division seems to be the primary meaning, as evidenced by the redirect still being in place. If you feel it should not be the primary meaning, please propose a move, and we'll see what the consensus is. For the record, I would agree that "NCAA Division III" would be a better title than "Division III (NCAA)". Powers T 14:01, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
your undoing of Dec. 6th on Council-Manager GovernmentEdit
First, let me say that I am new at contributing to Wikipedia and appreciate your comments--I am assuming that you are a “seasoned” user or an "official" of Wikipedia. Also, I did not mean to just undo your undo; I had not yet discovered the "talk" feature.
Could you please point out the “poorly written” parts of the piece of mine you “undid”? You are welcomed to try to revise it.
As for the content itself: The material is not a direct quote; it is, however, primarily taken from the source I cited, probably the most complete historical recount on this topic I have come across so far. I have other sources that corroborate this information. Could you please explain further your statement regarding not being able to accept …”text copied from other sources.” I though that under the Fair Use doctrine material could be directly quoted or summarized, as long as proper credit was given, i.e., a citation.
response to Dec. 7th message--response to my message to youEdit
Thanks for the input! The reason I went back to edit the hyphens was that I had drafted my piece on a word processor, and then pasted it into the Wikipedia space--it had left some stray marks which I did not notice till after i had saved it. Alos, if what you meant by "waffling" was wordy and not direct enough, I am trying to tighten that up somewhat. It does sound more like an essay or research paper now that I read it again after a few days. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fredvent (talk • contribs) 06:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
One question about Shoreliner IIIEdit
I have seen that you undid my revision on Shoreliner page. However, one thing come up in mind. According to TTMG, there are photos of Shoreliner III # 6211-6219 showing that there is no center door. Does other Shoreliner III have center doors? Please respond to me because I really need to know the correct information. Takuma Ishizeki (talk) 23:27, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Your revert of the MOS improvementEdit
Thanks for caring about Wikipedia style. I have a discussion going on about the relation of section naming to Wikipedia structure. Your edit summary, "Binding article structure is bad, as articles can change too much. Links to sections rare due to that reality" is worthy of discussion, don't you think? I hope you will take the time to own this issue with me. — CpiralCpiral 20:14, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the lesson on combining sources! Your revisions look fine!
council-managerchnages--charts+ added issue/discussionEdit
I changed the charts chiefly because the relation among the objects does not show the subordination correctly, using the conventions of organizational/corporate charts. The manager position should be below the council, not alongside it, to show the true superior-subordinate relationship. Also, without further detail in the narrative, the fairly detailed captions in the original charts tend to be confusing, I thought--of course this is just my opinion and we are a community here. The original charts are fancier than mine, however! I should probably add some captions to mine; I hope to build on it and possibly upload a mayor-council version as well.
While we are on the topic, don't you think the section on Ireland shoul be cited/referenced more?