User talk:Josiah Rowe/Archive 11
 | This 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. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
This archive covers discussion from September to October of 2007.
please explain more fully...
I left a question about an excision you made. I thought I would give you a heads-up. I hope you can return and explain your reasoning more fully...
Cheers! Geo Swan 10:57, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Fun Home FA
Hey, just popped by to congratulate you on the promotion! It was awesome being part of it and watching it go to GA. The rapid rise to FA was impressive, well done. The Rambling Man 10:25, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yup. Congrats and I hope you can now work your magic on Blankets (graphic novel), Ghost World, Maus, ... Pascal.Tesson 13:19, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Source for Image:Alisonbechdel2.jpg
Hi, Remember the dot. I just got back from vacation and noticed that you had tagged Image:Alisonbechdel2.jpg as lacking source information. However, you forgot to inform Tvengela (talk · contribs), who is presumably the only person who knows the source (I'd guess that Tvengela took the picture herself, although we need her confirmation for that). I've added a note on her talk page, but I saw that she hasn't edited since November 1, 2006. I'm wondering whether she has an account on a Wikipedia in another language — I'm about to do some searching for someone else using that username. However, this search may take some time. Is it permissible to reset the clock on the speedy deletion, so that we've got a full week to find Tvengela? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 02:56, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- We'd probably best delete the image, and then re-upload it in high resolution to the Commons if the uploader is contacted and agrees to relicense. Keeping non-commercial-use-only images is a no-no because of WP:CSD#I3. —Remember the dot (talk) 04:28, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- Is there any harm in delaying the deletion for a day or two, to give the photographer a chance to respond? (I did email her a request that the photo be released under an acceptable license.) I know that there is no deadline — but honestly, the reason I'd like to keep the image is that I'm hoping to get the newly promoted FA Fun Home on TFA for September 10, which is Alison Bechdel's birthday, but that's not going to happen if we don't have a free image. If I don't hear from the photographer in a few days, or if she doesn't want to license the image freely, I'll delete it myself, but I'd kind of like to give it a few days to breathe. Is that OK? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- I'm giving it 7 days, but having an image with a copyright problem is not going to help you get an article on WP:TFA. Feel free to change the tag to {{cc-by-nc-2.0}} if you want the image gone before the 7 days are up. —Remember the dot (talk) 04:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- 7 days should be plenty. Thanks. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:48, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Convincing me to continue?
Josiah, as an editor and admin who I respect and have turned to for advice before, I was going to come to your talk page and ask you to convince me somehow to continue editing and contributing to Wikipedia, but then I saw the section on your user page about the summer. I wonder, what keeps you going through all this? Besides seeing issues with the bureaucracy and the non-free-content policy (I about had it when a large batch of ancient coin images, coins which are locked away in archives in museums around the world, were proded and deleted because they were not free), I'm just so fatigued from fighting with people who do not respect academic sources or consensus, who dismiss other expert sources and discount sources as unreliable because they simply have not heard of them, who throw ludicrous information into articles either from ludicrous sources or without any sources whatsoever, who want to whitewash all LGBT information from articles unless it is triple and quadruple sourced (because, of course, this information is an 'outrageous attack' and part of a 'homosexual agenda'), how my being gay automatically makes me a 'pro-gay POV-pusher', and on and on and on....I'm just not sure I can take it anymore. Any advice? :-/ CaveatLector Talk Contrib 15:52, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Replies?
Josiah: I respectfully request that you return to Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons to comment on replies to your questions there. Thanks very much. --NYScholar 19:34, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. My subseq. comments are on that talk page. --NYScholar 00:42, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Pic
Re:this - have you heard anything more? Raul654 22:42, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Del Amitri
Sorry just found your note.
Well my sister was at school with Laura who owned said handbag / purse style and wasdating Justin Currie at the time they needed a name........ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Graemesmith (talk • contribs) 22:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Fun Home edit
Well then, why does the image description page say that it is her father? Answer that smart guy! Hardeeharhar!!!
I am smart
And you are dumb
You eat dirt
And suck your thumb
Kidding! Dreamy \*/!$! 20:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- Er... it doesn't. It says that she took the photograph, and used it for reference for her father. But I suppose it could be clearer. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 20:39, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Fun Home
Congratulations on an article you did so much work on making the front page! Angmering 21:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
No good deed goes unpunished...
I feel your pain...mine's up today. — BQZip01 — talk 23:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Macintosh user category deletion
Hi, Jc37. I just discovered that all the Macintosh user categories have been deleted, after only three editors participated in the discussion. I suppose it's my own lookout, for not keeping up with UCfD, and I don't really feel strongly enough about the matter to put it up on deletion review — but I was wondering if you could provide some context for this. I gather that some other computer-related user categories have been deleted recently. Do you plan to nominate all the categories in Category:Wikipedians by operating system, including Category:Wikipedians who use Windows and its subcats? If not, why were the Macintosh categories singled out? What's the context here? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:38, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- I understand your confusion. I'm not sure I understand why the three operating system cats were deleted either. I've asked the closer for clarification. - jc37 01:22, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- It turns out that it was a mistake. The operating system cats have been restored. - jc37 03:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Origin of the name Oz
I dunno, I seem to remember at least three pretty convincing sources quoted in "The Annotated Wizard of Oz" regarding the filing cabinet story - Maude in an interview, Harry somewhere else -though sources vary as to whether the cabinet had 3 drawers or 4, whether this took place in Baum's study or in the living room... I'd say it's as reliable as it is likely to get at this point in history. At the very least the article should state that this is a leading theory for how Baum came up with the name, don't you think? --woggly 14:49, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think Baum ever addressed the issue of languages, beyond that episode you remember from "The Land of Oz", but I seem to have some vague recollection of John R. Neill discussing "Ozzish" in one of his later books. Then again, John R. Neill's take on Oz is a bit too off the wall for me; I've always suspected him of making up his stories, as opposed to documenting true Oz history (or hoztery, as we like to call it). Seriously though, try asking Scott Hutchins.--woggly 07:34, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
redirect on ITN
Would you mind tweaking the wikilink on the ITN template to 2007 Peruvian meteorite event? We just renamed it from the old illness title; this one is much better. • Lawrence Cohen 23:54, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- I see you got it, thanks! • Lawrence Cohen 23:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Unblanking
Per my further comments on the talkpage, I strongly oppose your decision. I can only see it causing more drama which seems totally counterproductive. I also think calling the few people who have turned up to complain "a consensus" is a little odd - a lot of people must have not opposed the blanking, several have supported it. By definition those who disagree are more likely to post on the talkpage. I think you should have sought wider discussion before reverting me, especially on a protected page. WjBscribe 19:50, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- I think I've stated my opinion clearly in a number of places- we need to be much more proactive on courtesy blankings. They are trivial - the history is maintained for all to see, it just counteracts the high google profile of the discussion. I am of the opinion that courtesy blankings should be done on request wherever such meta discussion contains both a person's real name and negative comments about them. If longstanding contributors are extended a lower standard of courtesy than subject of the encyclopedia, then I think something has gone wrong with our thinking on the subject. Don't post at ANI though. That really will be prolonging the drama unnecessarily. I disagree with your decision, and am unhappy with it but I don't intend to take any further steps in this matter. WjBscribe 20:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Re: "Arctic" vs. "arctic"
Thank you for pointing that out to me! I was aware of the lowercase arctic usage, and I'm constantly skipping over "arctic" when my spell-checker points it out to me - a lot of false positives. I always check the context it's used in, and I did in this case too, however, the context was misleading. I saw the word "climate" and assumed it needed to be capitalized. I was wrong and I guess I need to pay more attention to how it's being used. Thanks again. Cheers. Rocket000 06:10, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
valid date change
You reverted my change in the Fourth_Doctor page from 2012 to 2007. I think my year is more correct, here's why:
In order for someone to be a longer running Doctor than the 4th, they must first be a Doctor for 7 years. The earliest time at which this can happen is 2012, if the currect Doctor stays with the series that long. Regardless, 2012 is the earliest date at which this information can become outdated, so "as of 2012" is more accurate than "as of 2007". On this ground, I am going to revert the article back to the 2012 version. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.114.66.43 (talk) 11:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thx
I'll try and get my etymology right next time! ... thx for pointing it out Victuallers 15:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
User space
Hi Josiah,
I edited your sandbox when updating a template redirect, hope you don't mind. I just went ahead and approved the edit as I didn't think it'd be contentious.
Take care, Matthew 10:25, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
help
I got your message, but you know I am sick of all of this, I have literally spent hours trying to delete my info off wikipedia, I put up a deletion tag, he takes it down!! he is berserk!!! he is on wikipedia like 10 hours a day! has left abusive messages on my page! falsly accused me of being other users-puppeting or something!! this is outragesous!!! please help me, I just want to bloody delete off my info!! this should not be bloody rocket science! I managed to get some info off of wiki ( I had to wait until it was like 2 in the morning his time to do this) I shouldnot have to waste my precous time this way!!! my safety is at risk, the guy has published my home address, my work address!!! this is bull, sorry for the tone of this, but I am not going to sit back and take thisHelpme20 20:21, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thanks!
I appreciate getting back to me, I am pulling my hair out in frustration! my email is messed up though, let me fix things and I will email you the problem, one more thing, I do have the right to edit off inof of my discussion page, do I not ? I keep deleting off my work place info (they have no right to put it there!) and the other user keeps putting it back-strictly to harass me! what right do other wikipedians have to know my workplace, please advice? —20:54, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Helpme20
I see you've already deleted the result of her community ban. So you can familiarize yourself with her problems, check User:Precious Roy/sockproblems for a fairly complete history of diffs. I thought you might like to see solid proof of what she's done, as opposed to the bald-faced lies she tells without any links to back it up with. Precious Roy 12:36, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
- I can't access email (to authenticate my account) from where I am right now but will when I am able, later today. Cheers! Precious Roy 17:30, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Recent reversion
Yes, I apologised immediately to Tony Sidaway for that - I inadvertently hit the mouse button; I was going to undo the edit with an appropriate comment. Sorry for any confusion. Stephenb (Talk) 17:24, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, thanks, I'm not planning to revert again. However, it makes it difficult when new and anon editors keep making the same change without reading the discussion - this leaves the article in an inconsistent, or plain wrong, state. Especially frustrating when certain editors keep making statements of belief without proof, meaning that consensus is unlikely to be reached. Stephenb (Talk) 19:44, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Don't threaten me!
I did not intentional vandalize the page....check the history file! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.42.35.66 (talk) 02:07, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
- Replied at User talk:68.42.35.66. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:23, 31 October 2007 (UTC)