User talk:Jokestress/2007
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Thanks for all the re-stubs
I appreciate your restubbing all the bios I start. Whenever I try a specific stub beyond [country]-bio-stub, it doesn't seem to exist, and I'd rather focus on other things. Thanks again! Jokestress 08:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
- My main contribution is with the stub sorting project, and right now I'm working on trying to sort the US-bio-stub's since that's one of our largest stub categories at the moment. So it's not as if I'm stalking you or anything.
. Caerwine Caer’s whines 08:41, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Laser hair removal
Hi, I noticed you were particularly interested in laser hair removal. I've noticed the current wikipedia article on that subject doesnst seem to mention any method suited for the removal of non-pigmented hairs.
Syneron markets its Elos systems that are supposed to work on any hair color. I'm not familiar with laser technology, so I didn't edit the relevant article, but maybe you can do something with this information:
Here are some clinical papers on the Elos laser hair removal system: http://www.syneron.com/Solutions/Clinical_Results/Clinical_Papers/Hair_Removal.html
Best regards! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Raaah (talk • contribs) 12:21, 5 January 2007 (UTC). --Raaah 12:24, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
W.Somerset Maugham
Given your previous or current interest in Somerset Maugham - can you please add any thoughts you might have at Talk:W. Somerset Maugham#What next? Peer Review? so that we can move the article up a notch? VirtualSteve 09:14, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
DEFAULTSORT
Since you typically start a number of biographies (with reasonable quality thankfully) I thought you might be interested in a new bit of WikiMagic that got added recently. If you use {{DEFAULTSORT:LastName, First Middle}} you don't need to pipe in a sort key for each individual category anymore as DEFAULTSORT will cause them to use what you give after the colon instead. Caerwine Caer’s whines 05:01, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Happy New Year & Help again?
I hope you have had a good start of the new year. I hate to bother you again, but would you mind please coming to look at Jim Shapiro? This is a problem, and is up for AfD, now. The first article was speedy deleted and salted. The author objected, wrote another article with a variation on the name, to get around the salt. Then it was unsalted, and the author wrote the attack page again, and an admin tried to make something workable out of it (but cannot, as she states in the AfD). The author of the article has now made an identical article, only now he is calling it Jim Shapiro and Legal Ethics,to avoid calling it a WP:BIO. This is exactly what he did the first time, only now he is doing it before the AfD is over. He grossly misrepresents the sources he cites (someone else called it WP:NPOV#Undue weight in an attempt to justify "notability". The subject of the article does not look like any saint (that's an understatement) but he is a licensed attorney. He is also not notable except for his obnoxious ads in his local area -- and "Overlawyered" of course, picked it up. Anyway, this is a problem, as is this editor. It is beyond my "Wikipedia" experience, but it looks like this author is obsessed about this, and about bashing lawyers. I'd appreciate any help possible. Jance 22:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Piergiorgio Welby
I have seen you have started Piergiorgio Welby article (and, BTW, thanks for the message).but I have access to many sources on this topic, most of which are obviously in Italian language: I can help expand the article, citing all necessary references and sources, but I'd appreciate a linguistic review on what I will write. Eurogeek 18:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Scooter v Lewis
You are correct that he used the name "Lewis Libby" as the author of The Apprentice. However, in his primary and more significant political career, he is exclusively known as, goes by, and introduces himself to people as Scooter. Lewis Libby is not his given name either, inasmuch as "I. Lewis Libby Jr." is closer. See Talk:Scooter Libby/Archive 1. --User At Work 20:29, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Scooter Libby was the name that he answers to, or I should say answered to until he was thrust into the spotlight by the trial. For example he's Scooter Libby in "State of Denial". Scooter never had been a mocking name; it was just what he was called and what he called himself. Like Mark Twain or Dizzy Gillespie. I guess if he and his lawyers want to rebrand himself that's okay, but we generally place articles at the most common name, and Scooter Libby is by far the most common. --User At Work 22:35, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Vandalism "by Jokestress"
Just wanted you to see [1].. He may not even know that you go by this name, but I thought you should know.
Invitation!
Heya! I saw your edits to Blanchard, Bailey, and Lawrence theory, and would like to invite you to join WikiProject LGBT studies. We would be delighted to have you on board! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on John B. Trevor Sr., requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (below the existing db tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Betaeleven 18:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Titles of the U.S. Code
I like the work you're doing. See the changes I've made to Title 13 of the United States Code. Maybe you can do the same with with other articles as you create them. —Markles 23:11, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- I assume the above was sarcasm. You have been contributing here long enough: you should know that Title 12 of the United States Code was simply not acceptable as a Wikipedia article. It was all in SHOUTING for one thing. A list of links to WP articles might be acceptable. A list with no explanation or interpretation is not acceptable. I have moved it to User:Jokestress/sandbox. Please do not copy it back until it is a proper article. -- RHaworth 01:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Um… it wasn't sarcasm. These articles need to be better flushed out it's true, but someone has to start them and it seems that you, Jokestress, were the one to do it.—Markles 02:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
stubs
I noticed that you're creating a lot of very short articles on US government codes. Please put {{US-gov-stub}} at the bottom of each page so that other editors may be able to expand them in the future. --Tainter 17:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Vandalism 204.193.129.239
Please keep in mind that this IP is registered to SUNY Purchase College, and that your messages will likely not read by the individual responsible. While this IP may be blocked as any other, consider that it is connected to computers which are open to numerous individuals who may also make constructive edits. Lucky number 49 21:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, ok then. Thank you. Lucky number 49 21:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
A barnstar
Sometimes, there is nothing more magical on Wikipedia than to see a little article suddenly sprinkled with references. Thanks for making my day. :-) --HappyCamper 06:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Accountability
I thought your comments were so helpful. Gwen Gale 10:48, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Question on conflicts of interest:
How close can I be to an institution or a person, before I can not edit a page on that subject? In Wikipedia, is there a strict rule on conflicts, e.g., no employers, no people you've met, 6 degrees of separation? Can I note in the discussion page about my potential conflict? I ask because I've realized now that I've done some edits that might involve a conflict of interest, but I've tried to be as neutral as possible. For examples, I am a member of the Episcopal Diocese of Albany, I am a fan of the now-defunct Riddlin' Kids, and I have also requested an article on David Alan Miller, with whom I am acquainted. It seems to me that some conflict of interest is inevitable, if you write or edit on something with which you are familiar. Bearian 17:49, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Oops, I found your posting on my userpage from 1 April 2007. Thanks. I will exercise great caution. Bearian 18:06, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Daniel Brandt AfD #13
Hi Jokestress. I was cleaning up the Daniel Brandt AfD #13 and came across your post near section break 2. It looks like you may have wanted to vote Keep. I reformatted your post by adding a : and I added Comment. Please review my change. Thanks. (P.S., when I'm done, I plan to cite your well-reasoned post as one of the reasons for my keep vote.) -- Jreferee 18:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
- I messed up. I thought that your post was the second opinion under section break 2. Thanks for fixing it. -- Jreferee 19:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
hi
hi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siobhan Harrell (talk • contribs)
single??
if you are single email bekki.janssen1986@googlemail.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Siobhan Harrell (talk • contribs) 17:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC).
- Mr. Harrell, what makes you think Ms. A. James has any reason to do so, or that a WP talk page is the right forum for such a thing?
- That said, I was going to leave a compliment on your appearance, Ms. James, both as a good-looking woman, and as a great example of how well SRS can turn out in that regard. :)
- Zuiram 19:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Re: Daniel Brandt
Sorry - I didn't even see the NYT citation. --Random832 20:59, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
DRV Stats
If you want to see overturn rates, or even review rates, by administrator, I think you are going to need to do the research yourself. The folks at [[WP:SCISSORS] might be willing to help. The log archives are at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Archive. The only stats I know of on deletion review outcomes are those I did that are now filed at Wikipedia talk:Deletion review/Archive 9#December 2006 Deletion Statistics. GRBerry 22:59, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Regarding Miriam being attacked and it not being reported in the media
I know this is not good for a source for a wikipedia article but this is the only source I know of right now. I am going to ask them if this is going to be reported in some media source anytime soon. There were more pictures posted there at one time. Showing the screws in Miriam and the huge gash and head injury etc. Those have been taken down.
Why does the "transgendered activist" community not care about this event? Why has so much hay been made over the firing of some body while somone of note can get nearly killed? What the heck is going on with the activist and their priorities? If a young woman like Miriam, who was on International TV and was Internationa news not much more that 2-3 years ago can be ignored like this....then it is no wonder that so many who are less noted, less famous can find graves marked "John doe". --Hfarmer 13:47, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- I got your message. Great! With people like you this will get the media attention==>police pressure that is warranted. Thankyou. --Hfarmer 23:51, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Publicis & Hal Riney, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (below the existing db tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Bmg916 Speak to Me 19:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- I've removed the speedy deletion tag I placed on the article. Please, however try to expand the article using more sources and asserting more of its notability. It seems to me from what has been written so far, that this is possible. Thank you. Bmg916 Speak to Me 19:22, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank you
for the welcome. I hope it wasn't a warning for the bad edits on the Richard Jeni page, because that wasn't me. (That said, I'm sure I'll be making plenty of mistakes.) Celedor15 21:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Celebrity Prank Call
If you have a chance, could you look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celebrity_prank_call and give an outsider's opinion as to which of the last two edits is appropriate, or if there should be a compromise? Celedor15 18:08, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- I was checking out the history of edits the last few months for Celebrity Prank Call, and it's not pretty. Lots of reverts - I recommend it be merged, as you suggested, with Prank Calls to end it all. Celedor15 02:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
LGBT people
Hi...just to let you know, we don't actually file people directly in Category:LGBT people; the only things that should be there are subcategories and lists. We file actual articles in the appropriate subcategory of Category:LGBT people by nationality, and, if one is suitable, a subcategory of Category:LGBT people by occupation. Accordingly, I've moved your recent articles on people who were in Paris is Burning to Category:LGBT people from the United States. Just wanted to let you know. Bearcat 20:54, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Miriam
Sure did look like a fan page. Every image was unsourced, so they're bound to be deleted shortly. -- Longhair\talk 06:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Apples and oranges. The Sinbad thing has the feature of being false. You yourself called somenone who knows Miriam and confirmed that this happened. There is a time to adhere strictly to rules and a time to be flexible. As for the pictures there seem to be people on this cite (not you)...in particular editors of anything remotely "transgender" related who wish to eliminate all pictures. I can only wonder why. --Hfarmer 20:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Largely because of issues with licensing, copyright and privacy. We went over this before in detail re. the collage on Transsexualism last year - Alison☺ 16:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
You know, if you'd joined WP:LGBT when I invited you to, you could have used our peer review, which would probably have gotten you a much faster response... :D Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 08:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- Excellent! It'll be good to have you! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 16:04, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks...
...for wikifying my entry on Ken Jowitt-a relative of mine-recently.
I haven't spent much time here of late, and most of it is devoted to subjects I'm well acquainted with, e.g. K.C. Johnson, a former professor of mine at Brooklyn College.
Can't say that I do as much fine-tuning on the technical aspects of these articles so I appreciate the help in that regard.
It's funny, because just the other day I was watching Transamerica.
Very good film, BTW.
Ruthfulbarbarity 03:41, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the welcome. Sorry I don't know how to reply other than here.... (Serkul 20:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC))
Thank you, Jokestress, for the welcome. I am really new to web 2.0, especially Wikipedia. Is it O.K. to just jump in and Wikify someone else's article? I'm happy to have done it when I can. I am working on a project to get all Legal articles done from WP:AR1. Also, can I add people I know, if their articles are requested, or have those red links on other pages (e.g., Bishop David Standish Ball? I still have trouble remembering the four tilde thing. So here it is. Bearian 01:26, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Re: Eve Ensler
Hi there! I saw that you removed some info from the Eve Ensler article with a fairly official-sounding notation. Does that mean there was a complaint? The statements about her father are widely reported and often a topic in her work (NYT,Lifetime, NPR). Her relationship status was out of date, but she was living with someone for about 15 years prior to a messy breakup. I wanted to check in with you before adding this stuff in, since the link to OTRS doesn't explain anything, and I don't know how to view the original ticket. Thanks! Jokestress 15:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, I'd appreciate a response. Thanks! Jokestress 17:32, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Re:your last message
You know people who know her personally eh. I met her at a bar in Chicago called El-Gato Negro just this last October/November. I know people who know her and people who know Allahna(sp?) (one of whom post on HA using the name TsVanessa69, met her at Howard Brown Center here in Chicago.) I am aware of her bad rep and not via some web forum; and I say that people in glass houses should not throw stones. I have a bad rep with some people and so do you. Who dosen't? Who cares and in fact the person you cite is the very person who has confirmed that this attack happened. That she has been in Porno is an indisputable fact.
My feelings on this matters are rooted in a great sense of injustice. How is it that transsexuals like Steve Stanton are always so aggrandized(observe his extensive wikipedia article as just one example of this) and transsexuals like Izza Lopez are so ignored( in practically the same situation somehow no one has thought to create a wikipedia article as of this date. So I will). How is it that transsexuals like Miriam often get treated like second class citicezens specifically by transsexual activist? (Do some of them perhaps find transsexuals like her threatening in some way? ) What I do here I feel is the least I can do to reverse what I think is wrong with the "transgendered community". As far as you thinking I worship her please! If anyone I worship Dr. Conway. In a way I have modeled my life after hers. Which would not mean parroting her points of view (what scientist would want that?).--Hfarmer 18:21, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Claim to have more street cred? No I never said that. I however am not totally devoid of street cred. --Hfarmer 19:30, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Furthermore, wikipedia may not be the right place to right great injustices, at least not totally. However if it is going to cover transsexual people it should cover all transsexual people of note with equal weight, if they are of equal note. Soapboxing would be to fill an article with POV writing. That's never what I have done. What I have done is dare to oppose you the great and mighty Andrea James on various issues. Look in the mirror. Much of what you accuse me of is just exactly what you actually do. --Hfarmer 19:45, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
I am Vanessa from Chicago, TsVanessa 69. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.193.99.229 (talk) 18:51, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi and thanks for your note. Having two sopranos with the same name is tricky. Were they related? - Kleinzach 22:54, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- The older Esty is not listed in (our bible) the New Grove Dictionary of Opera. Anyway I think the two ladies are as well distinguished as they can be under the present WP system. I don't think we can invent titles such as 'Alice Esty the Younger' and 'Alice Esty the Elder'. Best. - Kleinzach 23:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Reply
I have given a bit of thought to what you said here...
If you don't see why many inside and outside the community have a problem with Miriam's reality show, maybe you should step back and think about why for a second. Her appearances undermined the efforts of a lot of hard-working activists.
I personally don't think she misreprestnted anything. Not all transsexuals are alike and many have feelings that are more like Miriam's. She was being honest about her feelings and what could possibly be wrong with that? Nothing that's what.
I see why and understand the motivation of people in "the transgendered community" who think that the way Miriam represented herself on that show set back their agenda. However that is totally illogical. In fact it was not until after her appearance and the apperance of Nadia Alamada on Big brother that the laws in the UK were loosened to make things easier for TS women to change their documents. I believe it is called the Gender Recognition act of 2004. Many years of efforts on the part of activist along with the easing of public opinon brought on by those TV shows helped make that possible. Before then most people in England had never heard the voice of TS's in their own words at length just takling about their feelings (too often here in America it seems that the TS oh excuse me "transgendered" people who appear on TV here always seem nervous, to say the least. The last I saw on TV seemed to by trying to remember a script, a party line to tow, rather than talking about how they felt.) The shows did not do it by themselves not what I am saying at all. Either they did not hurt or they helped because that Gender recognition act did pass.
Lighten up. --Hfarmer 00:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Hey you went to commenting on the TV show you read politics into what I have tried to do with this article. I merely followed your lead on that. You also made some comments about a person you were trying to make a biography of that could sound a bit hostile to the subject of the article. :-| (as matter of factly and unemotionally as possible I am telling you how some of your actions on this look.) Some of your actions on this it is as if you are not leaving other things that were happening in the world in 2003 and 2004 out of this. (ahem). Disputes you had in other places with other people who I dont' 100% agree with either. (ahem. umm.) (note you wrote that you had argued with me before. Re read what we wrote about the other articles we worked on we did not argue much at all then.)--Hfarmer 01:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I searched for what UK PFC had to say about it. What I found was reprehensible for them to say. About her and other non-op's for that matter.
(Cut and paste the Url as it contains spaces and will not wikifi correctly. ) "http://www.wallbanks.com/PDF/CONTEMPORARY HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES FOR PEOPLE WITH TRANSSEXUALISM R Wallbank 290804A.pdf "CONTEMPORARY HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES FOR PEOPLE WITH TRANSSEXUALISM, Paper delivered at the Gendys conference September,2004, UK. by RACHAEL WALLBANK BA LLB ACCSPEC (FAMILY LAW) LSNSW, NSW AUSTRALIA 1805" page 2 foot note 3
The Australian movie Pricilla Queen of the Desert and the recent Channel 10 program There’s Something About Miriam is a good example of the confusion, exploited by the program, between people who have no desire or need to bring their body (and especially their genitalia) into harmony with their mind who display transgender expression and are, subject to their own confusion, extreme cross-dressers, and do not experience transsexualism yet are labelled as such. People with transsexualism undergo sex affirmation surgery for their own benefit and peace; rathe than choice.
(Sic)
That is the only reliable thing I could find about them and their criticism. If anything Miriam would have been a victim in that and instead what I read reads like things I have had said to me in support groups by jelous older people. To their credit UK PFC did also, reportedly, and correctly complain about the press coverage of the show early on as refering to Miriam as a man and saying other really insensitive things({irony}but the only link still in existance I can find is no a message board{/irony}). How ironic that they would go on to effectively do the same exact thing they once complained about. I'm not sure where to put that in an article. Perhaps I could cite it as an example of UK PFC's being two faced? --Hfarmer 02:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- I fixed the broken link. The page is on the website of someone associated with UK PFC and it was presented at the Gendy's conference as it says. It represents their POV on non-op transsexuals. A point of view that is frankly a rather elitist and ethnocentric one at that. I persist here for if It were put in the pertinent talk page or in the article you would be most likely to object (right). So to preempt that I think it prudent to run this past you. --Hfarmer 04:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the welcome Jokestress. I'm still working on finding my way around here ... and hope this is the right way to respond to the note you left in my user talk. Take care, Mstabba 16:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Blocking vandals
Is it possible for an important editor such as yourself to block certain addresses or suers? Two people keep attacking the LaSalle Institute article. They are users ID'd by their IP's:
- 24.92.50.237
- 74.70.50.199
They have also attacked some other sites. What can we do? Bearian 00:41, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- Neither of them got the message after you warned them, Andrea. Both now blocked for 24 hours for vandalism past final warning - Alison☺ 03:51, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- More attacks on La Salle Institute from 66.177.4.136. What's going on? Bearian 20:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Image:Jokestress.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Jokestress.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 00:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Michael Halberstam
There was a great deal of confusion in reportage immediately following Michael Halberstam's shooting. It was actually Mike Halberstam, not his wife, who entered their home first. This is from The Washington Star. "Halberstam and his wife, Elliott Jones, came back to their darkened home at 8:44 p.m. Jones heard her husband tell her to ‘get down’ because there was someone in the house. Halberstam and the intruder had a confrontation inside the house and the burglar shot the doctor twice in the chest." (The Washington Star December 7, 1980). I don't like to make edits without first discussing them with the author.Poodle Girl 02:45, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't mean to remove the citations. You're right in surmising that I need help with referencing. I have a great many old clippings about Mike Halberstam, but the one on the Internet at:http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9C00E3D61139F932A25757C0A967948260&n=Top%2fNews%2fU%2eS%2e%2fU%2eS%2e%20States%2c%20Territories%20and%20Possessions%2fWashington%2c%20D%2eC%2e covers what I believe is needed now. I would be very grateful if you could add the citation to the article. Many thanks! Poodle Girl 01:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Daniel Brandt
Out of curiosity what is the goss about Daniel Brandt? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 18:18, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Thankyou. Its just from what I have seen - isn't this guy more trouble than he's worth!!! The question is however much he aims to disrupt the main global sites on the internet, would a conventional encyclopedia really have an article on him?? Its amazing that someone devotes their life to criticism!!
Anyway I see you work in the film industry in LA. Sounds like a very interesting job indeed. I have been particularly active in films on wikipedia you are welcome to become a part of WP: Films or WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers which I recently created!!! Any knowledge you have would be very useful indeed. All the best ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 18:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
US sociologist
I added a category. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 20:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for starting Judge Lay's article. I was going to try to do it tonight, but am glad I was beaten to it. Regards, Newyorkbrad 22:00, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- I've added an infobox and picture to his article. Regards. WooyiTalk, Editor review 01:07, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Dammit, you beat me to starting the article, but I've expanded it a great deal from the NYT and LAT obits. I'm also nominating it to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. Regards, howcheng {chat} 07:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
|
On 11 May, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Edward F. Boyd, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. |
--howcheng {chat} 16:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Alphonse Ardoin
Hi, thanks for starting the Alphonse "Bois Sec" Ardoin article. I've added a little to it. Also, he may not have been academically trained, but he was not an autodidact, something folklorists get mighty upset about if they see that in print, so I fixed it. Question, though. I feel strongly the title of the article should include his nickname, since that was how he was always known and introduced when performing. You've created a redirect that leads to an article without the nickname in the title, but I think it should go the other way around. Any objections if I change it? Thanks. Bruxism 03:05, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the help. Can you just be clear about the sources for some ofthe events you added? Thanks. Looks great though. ThuranX 00:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! I'm glad to know the NYTimes ran it, and have to literally run out now and buy that issue for my records. (I'm not crazy, Edwin Scheier is a distant, and semi-estranged cousin.) It's why the pages have been rather slowly built, I'm trying my best to avoid COI's and OWN vios by sourcing things zealously. I have their Currier Exhibit book packed away, and can't find it, or the articles would probably be twice as long, but without a full sourcing and reading, I can't use my memory. Thank you very much for the source. Can you please add it in the right places in the article? Many thanks. ThuranX 01:08, 20 May 2007 (UTC) (PS - you hit my userpage, not my user talk.)
Moving new pages to User pages
Hi again. How do I move a new article, whioch is obviously an autobiography or essay by a newbie to WP, to a user page? I see these all the time. Bearian 02:02, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for help on all the articles. Bearian 03:20, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Cover Images help
Since you so generously offered, I have a question.
Is using the cover image of a book in an WP article considered "fair use"? Obviously, if the book is in the public domain, an image of it is also in the public domain. But what about facsimile editions, for example, that have introductions or annotations that have been copyrighted. Are the cover images of those usable? Especially if there is only typography on the cover, no photos or artwork. I notice that the major book selling sites, and many others as well, have cover images of new books posted. Becksguy 13:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
"Spouse" and Assembly Bill 205
Hi, Jokestress. I read your comments at Talk:Charles Nelson Reilly and wondered if this bill merited a mention in the article Common-law marriage. As for changing the infobox template, I thought the same thing a while ago when I was reading the article on Raymond Burr. What do you propose? --Rrburke(talk) 14:04, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- I agree in principle, but I think the problem might be that such a proposal will attract heat from both sides: from DOMA-sympathizers because, well, because -- and from progressives who will say you're advancing a "separate but equal"-type proposal. If I go, for instance, to the Raymond Burr article and swap out Robert Benevides from spouse to life partner, there will probably be some hue and cry -- even though the change would be entirely accurate. So what to do? --Rrburke(talk) 17:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- I believe the best bet is to start a discussion among the LGBT group, hash out our consensus there, then go to the infobox talk page and bring in other viewpoints. Let me know if that sounds OK, and I will check in with them tonight. Jokestress 17:17, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Dear Jokestress
_-_A_Little_Coaxing_(1890).jpg) |
Smile a little, smile a little, all along the road; Smile upon the troubled pilgrims whom you pass and meet; Smile upon your undone labour; not for one who grieves Have a beautiful day, dear Jokestress! :) Phaedriel |
Fast Company
Infobox spouse
FYI, I've copied your comment from from User talk:SatyrTN to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies#infobox spouse, where I think it deserves additional attention. Of course I left it at SatyrTN's talk page as well. Thanks! TAnthony 00:05, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Little context in Ddb (software)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Ddb (software), by Witchinghour, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Ddb (software) is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Ddb (software), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Ddb (software) itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 21:02, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Transamerica
Hi, Andrea! I was wondering if Transamerica would become a DVD, and what date is released. Thanks! :), --SWEETCARMEN♥ 02:47, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, okay. Is it available in Hollywood Video or Blockbuster? I can't seem to find the DVD anywhere... thanks anyways! Happy editing! :) --SWEETCARMEN♥ 00:27, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! --SWEETCARMEN♥ 00:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi
Just thought I'd drop by & say hi. :) Spawn Man 06:29, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm... I doubt it, we've both been here for a number of years & not crossed paths before from what I can tell. In fact I can't even remember how I came across your page. Spawn Man 07:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Not an admin?
Jokestress, are you really not an admin? I can't help but notice how thoughtful and polite your contributions are to what can be contentious debates, not to mention you've been around for over two years now and have made thousands upon thousands of helpful edits. RFerreira 07:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Dear Andrea
My dear Andrea, I'm sorry it took me a few days to get back to you and reply your charming message. It was wanderful to read about that beautiful event you were witnessing, and thinking that I played a role, even as minor as I can in that moment made me even happier. I've got a gift for you, and I hope you'll like it - but if you don't please, just let me know and I'll retouch it following your intructions. You asked me to redesign your page (and I followed your orders to the letter - no pink, no orange, and kept the warning on top! ;) Here you go. If you feel it's OK, just copy the code straight into your userpage, or let me know if you want further enhancements, k? My friend Alison provided inspiration for it with her choice of colors - so if you do like it, make sure to thank her as well! ;) Hope everything is going just fine. Have a beautiful weekend! Love, Phaedriel - 11:27, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Non-free use disputed for Image:Hustler7812.jpg
|
This file may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading Image:Hustler7812.jpg. 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. Videmus Omnia 01:57, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Mandate7511.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Mandate7511.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. Videmus Omnia 01:58, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Image:Backstage1983.jpg
I have tagged Image:Backstage1983.jpg as a disputed use of non-free media, because there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please clarify your fair use rationale on the image description page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 01:58, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Image:Barresi-perfect.jpg
I have tagged Image:Barresi-perfect.jpg as a disputed use of non-free media, because there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please clarify your fair use rationale on the image description page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 01:59, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Possibly unfree Image:Paul-barresi2jpg.jpg
Non-free use disputed for Image:Spit-take.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Spit-take.jpg. 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. Richmeistertalk 16:02, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Notability of Fact Magazine (UK)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Fact Magazine (UK), by VanTucky (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Fact Magazine (UK) seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Fact Magazine (UK), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 23:37, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi again. I've started this article, and placed it on peer review. How do I get it into the Did You Know space? It seems like an admin must nominate it. I turned down my last nom at RFA, but I might agree to it in part to be able to list articles at T:DYK. What do you think? Bearian 16:07, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Your help wanted
Angela, given your expertise can I ask you to take a look at Deirdre McCloskey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views); there is an academic dispute that some people want to write up there in order to imply that McCloskey is maliciously attacking J. Michael Bailey; I am not well placed to judge the significance of this dispute or the merits of Bailey's defence. Guy (Help!) 10:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Returned
Glad to see that you have returned and are editing again. :) Acalamari 03:13, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Mainstream Science on Intelligence: I thought this WAS sourced
Take a look at this edit. There are a group of editors who are removing all mention of the pioneer fund from this page. Isn't this information sourced? I don't have the book with me so I can't check, but at some point we should look in to this. futurebird 13:06, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- The myth of intelligence. This might be a good source, but I can't get the full text. futurebird 13:15, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Bearian's RfA
Hi, thanks again for supporting my RfA, which passed 63 to 1. I loved what you wrote about me in your comments. I hope that I am doing a good job so far. Bearian 20:59, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Don-ho.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Don-ho.jpg. 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 05:02, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Sibilla Aleramo, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://andrejkoymasky.com/liv/fam/bioa1/aler1.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 22:21, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Please fix this or it will be deleted. Bearian, a/k/a Bearian'sBooties (talk) 02:25, 26 November 2007 (UTC)