User talk:Mxpc05

Welcome!

Hello, Mxpc05, 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:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Longhair | Talk 04:46, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

University of Arizona[edit]

Hello. I am on vandalism patrol, so when I saw that you took out a few sections that are not described in much detail at the U of A's daugther article, Going back and looking at your edit in greater detail, I probably shouldn't have used the administrators' rollback, since it wasn't a malicious edit, so I apologize for that. That said, I have a few suggestions for the article: cut down on the list of champlionships, leaving only the really important ones (like the 1996 NCAA basketball trophy), but leave the rivalries on the main page, since those are important. For full disclosure, I'm a Sun Devil, so I don't know if that discounts my opinion... :P But then, I'm an admin too... :P Tito xd^{(?!? - did you read this?)} 23:49, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

U of A[edit]

Thanks for your message. Ok, I've added my comments. Dialog is good, just don't panic--we'll figure everything out on the page and make it look grand in the end. Madmaxmarchhare 04:34, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Summary Request[edit]

I have noted that you sometimes edit without an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. An edit summary is even more important if you delete any text; otherwise, people may think you're being sneaky. Also, mentioning one change but not another one can be misleading to someone who finds the other one more important; add "and misc." to cover the other change(s). Thanks! -- Kukini 18:42, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oro Valley edits[edit]

I think the record population growth would be something that could be interjected in the current state of OV. however, the table belongs in the demographics section, because its a demographic table, granted an important side note in the history section. It does have historical relevance, but its a bit redundant to have 2 tables, when the person reading the article can fancy towards demographics and population growth if they want specifics, after they read the side note in the history section pertaining to the abnormal population growth. Somerset219 02:09, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I have already given my input through the discussion page... I then edited. You have not responded to it. Considering that there is no such thing as a "status quo" for these articles, I fail to see why you keep reverting it back. I am tring to make the article flow better, disrupting the series of chronological paragraphs with an obscure table holds it up. I believe I've explained myself on the discussion page, please explain why the table "has" to be there.Somerset219 02:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MT Map questions[edit]

I have noticed that you have edited the maps showing the locations of various communities in Metro Tucson. I was wondering if you knew where it was that map originated, and on what data it was based. I'd like to know, because I am working on an .svg map of Pima County, and the data I found on PAG's website (from this map) doesn't show unincorporated areas. I'd like to include the borders for unincorporated areas from the existing maps that you have edited, but it doesn't show the full extents for all of them.

Thanks for the help.

Ixnayonthetimmay 08:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. I shall use the U.S. Census site for making maps if I can't find any more up-to-date versions on local government association sites. I have noticed from a quick perusing that the Census maps are from 2000 and in Arizona, where laws have been passed forbidding a field not being developed into a housing development before too long, they are slightly out of date.

Ixnayonthetimmay 22:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ironwood Ridge High School[edit]

Hi Mxpc05,

The tag stating that the article "indiscriminately cites" sources was added because the same source appears at the end of each paragraph. If the section is so closely tied to the subject of the pygmy owl, as concluded from the fact that each citation led to the same source, an "Owl Digest," perhaps this controversy description should be moved elsewhere, or shortened. Although perhaps a "one source template" reading "This article or section relies largely or entirely upon a single source." would have been in order, the suggestion that the citation is indiscriminate is also accurate. Indiscriminate is defined as wanton: one should use the source less.

A category of "School history" should provide a more broad array of information about a school, and while the pygmy own incident was integral to the development of the school, other, more varied, information should also be provided.

Thank-you,

Adamjaz

Hi Mxpc05,

Of the nine sources in the section, 5 link to the owl reference, 3 to a court document, and 1 to a commentary on said court document. Good Wikipedian style includes a variety of sources. It is usually not in good style to repeatedly refer to the same citation.

Although the school is relatively young, there must be more to the history than this. As the article is now, there's about one line of non-owl information. The pygmy owl's conservation should be part of the pygmy owl's article, with little crossover. Don't get me wrong, I think it should be mentioned, and even examined, but it seems too long. The citation quality could use improvement, and that's why I tagged it.

Please don't take my tag as a personal affront to your editing credibility.

AdamJaz 01:17, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Amphi logo.gif}[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:Amphi logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 02:26, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:NAU logo.gif)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:NAU logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notable alumni[edit]

Please see the note I left at Talk:Canyon del Oro High School#Notable alumni in regards to the names I removed from that list. The general rule is that such lists should only include names of people who have existing Wikipedia articles and thus likely have established notability. Those names I removed had no article and while they had a citation, simply being online and even having some quality accomplishments does not equal notability. That doesn't mean those people will never be notable; rather, it means they currently do not have notability. Further, only a brief statement is needed to mention the person's notability. The subject of the article is still CDO, so having a small paragraph on each person isn't necessary and includes information that is irrelevant to the topic. A small paragraph would be more appropriate for a school website or publication where more detailed info on each person is not readily available. On Wikipedia, if people want to learn more about that person, they can click the link to that article. --JonRidinger (talk) 16:49, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of L. W. Cross Middle School for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article L. W. Cross Middle School is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/L. W. Cross Middle School until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Raymie (t • c) 23:00, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Amphitheater Public Schools[edit]

Hello Mxpc05. Following an AfD outecome, a page you created has now been redirected. For more information please see the deletion discussion, and WP:WPSCH/AG. --Kudpung (talk) 22:36, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:MT Tanque Verde.PNG[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:MT Tanque Verde.PNG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sir Armbrust ^{Talk to me} _Contribs 23:07, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:MT Tucson.PNG listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:MT Tucson.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Sir Armbrust ^{Talk to me} _Contribs 23:09, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]