User talk:IMeowbot/4
| New comment? Click here. |
Re-Direct, Mary the elephant
[edit]Thanks, I didn't realize it was that easy. Wyss 23:35, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Yep... for some reason I thought an admin had to do it, thanks anyway, for responding so quickly! Wyss 23:43, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Orphan Works
[edit]Hiya iMeowbot. I thought you might be interested in this site. An excerpt:
- When you can't find copyright holders, copyright becomes a quagmire. Let's fix it. . . The Copyright Office has specifically asked for comments from people who have run up against the problem of trying to clear a potentially copyrighted work -- either for use in a new creative effort or simply to make the work available to the public once again. If you have a story like this, it's essential you make your voice heard.
Your comments are needed. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 15:23, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)
A big favor
[edit]Hello again. I'm trying to see if I can get an icon-like image for the Wikipedia:Image sleuthing project. I was thinking of something like a magnifying glass, or perhaps a person in a raincoat with a mustache holding a magnifying glass. But I can't find anything in the public domain that would fit the bill. Could you maybe whip something up for me? Thanks, – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 02:20, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)
Barnstar
[edit]LOL, thanks for the barnstar! I really appreciate it. =) Johnleemk | Talk 06:45, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Pol-Sov W Map
[edit]Yeah :) Voivodships of Poland has a nice collection of Polish maps over the centuries :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:48, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Just letting you know that User:Halibutt has also started work on the map - perhaps you two should coordinate somehow? Or are you already? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 12:04, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for adding to this article. I've posted some thoughts about the changes you made (generally positive) to its talk page. Cheers! FreplySpang (talk) 02:43, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
RFC 1123
[edit]Hurrah! I was looking for that exact quote. Thank you VERY much! Kim Bruning 11:05, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
User:Dr Zen/keepschools
[edit]The discussion on this template on a user subpage has been moved from WP:TFD to WP:VFD as user:Netoholic closed the discussion in its former location with the comment that TfD is only for entries in the Template: namespace. I have taken the liberty of moving your vote from its former location to the present discussion at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Dr Zen/keepschools. You may of course change your vote or stikethrough it all together in the normal way. To avoid any allegations of vote stacking I am contacting everybody who voted at TfD and Netoholic who closed the discussion, but not anybody who had not already expressed an opinion. Please feel free to disucss this on my talk page. Thryduulf 14:48, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Also, please give your opinion on the jurisdiction issue, at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Proposal. Radiant_* 15:36, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
- Oh, you happened to leave a copy of the above on a talk page where some minor wikidrama is happening, so I figured I'd wander over and instill a bit of paranoia. --iMb~Meow 12:00, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Userspace_policy_proposal
[edit]Hi there! I noticed you oppose most points here on grounds that they are redundant with existing policy, or with common sense. I wholeheartedly agree that they are redundant as such - however, the point of the proposal is (and perhaps this should be clarified on that page) that most policies are cheerfully ignored in user space. As stated at the top, we should either assert plainly that the relevant policies do apply in userspace (since that isn't obvious to everybody) or we should amend policy stating that they do not apply in user space.
In general, people can post personal attacks, disruptions and other unpleasantness in userspace, and claim that since it's userspace, that is all right. The whole question is, should existing policy apply? If you think it should, please consider voting to reflect that. Yours, Radiant_* 08:01, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
- I really believe that the proper way to deal with problems in user space is through the dispute resolution process (if talking doesn't work, go to RfC and so on). There is an ongoing problem, in that people keep trying to misuse the deletion process as a proxy for dispute resolution, but the solution is to use the correct process, not change the rules. --iMb~Meow 08:22, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- On the matter of offensive userpages, RfC would be appropriate, however it is likely to not work. And RFAr has more important matters to attend to. Suppose that User:Foo makes a user page that publically states that "User:Bar is an idiot". I don't believe there is anything User:Bar can do about that (other than revert warring). Should there be? And note that this is not a hypothetical case, but a true one.
- On other matters, such as 3RR'ing and keeping deleted pages, the main problem is that people don't know. You may claim that it's obvious that the policy applies, but other people disagree. This has sparked debate on WP:AN/I, among others, and the end result is that some people feel one shouldn't do that, and other people feel one should. I believe it would make sense, then, to establish consensus. You can call it instruction creep if you want but it's really just an answer to the question, 'does rule X apply in situation Y'. If you know a better solution I'd like to hear it. Radiant_* 08:44, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
I've closed this discussion as it seems to have reached a consensual conclusion. Could you please visit it briefly and tell on the talk page if you agree? Thanks, Radiant_* 10:35, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
Nice old Park Street photo
[edit]What would be even nicer would be a current image of the same spot. Any chance of getting this? --SPUI (talk) 17:49, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification on the date of the Pleasant Street Incline photo. I found it in the process of making Image:Main Line Elevated.jpg - do you know of anything I screwed up on that map? --SPUI (talk) 10:05, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've gotten full information on the Pleasant Street Incline configurations. I'll probably write it up at Pleasant Street Incline soon, as well as linking the commons photo there. --SPUI (talk) 13:53, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
FYI
[edit]Thanks for the link. Point taken. ;-) Still, we can't use Usenet as a secondary source, especially when using a person's real name, even if we think that what it says is true. SlimVirgin (talk) 20:40, May 5, 2005 (UTC)