User talk:Gephart/Archive1

Celebrity Phish Fans

I noted on your recent reversion to put back the "Celebrity Fans" section that you say the issue is still being discussed? By who? I openly laid out my points, noted that I was open to hearing from anyone who has something to contribute, and plainy stated that if no one wished to discuss the matter or respond to my viewpoints that I was planning on removing the section in question. If you wanted to discuss the matter and the two of us could come to consensus that would be great. But I waited a number of days, as I stated I would, waiting for objections and a discussion to develop, but no one said anything. I'm certainly willing to listen to all sides of the argument, but if you were going to revert I would've hoped that you would also start talking about the issue and responding to my points in the relevant "Talk" section without simply mentioning in your edit history that the issue was "still being discussed", which it is not. Thanks, and Fall 95 forever. Read Icculus 12.218.37.174 21:41, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Four Tildes, Etc.

The point of signing posts is so that people can keep track of the discussion, so that people can easily tell how many different people are involved, and can easily tally up votes for and against whatever may be in dispute. It also provides a date so that you can see how long a debate has been going on. It's useful.

I don't understand your post on my talk page. What could you be trying to achieve with that kind of rudeness/vandalism?

Btw, capricious means "Characterized by or subject to whim; impulsive and unpredictable." I don't see how that applies to my request that people sign their posts. Psora 03:48, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

<quote>Ok, the multiple signitures was kind of a joke, but your clearly one of those uptight people who can't understand humor, so i have taken the liberty and removed them. Also, your point is well noted about the signatures, i was just saying that sometimes you add the comment to sign and sometimes you dont on your posts, saying that when you did it was rather capriousous. So, please dont insult me, or worse make yourself look like an eyedot by questioning my syntax. Thank you, and have a wonderful day. --Gephart 04:26, 21 October 2005 (UTC) </quote>

I apologize if I insulted you -- not my intention at all. I always sign posts, but it seems that some people have a habit of deleting portions of other people's posts. In fact, you did that on the phish:talk page the other day. I fixed it, so no hard feelings, I'm sure it was just a mistake. As for humor, is "fuck tard" also supposed to be funny? Psora 04:44, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

CERN edits

DARPA funded the development of the Internet. You'll find that the World Wide Web was invented by Tim Berners-Lee at CERN around 1990. I am changing the CERN article back. -- SCZenz 04:35, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

No worries. -- SCZenz 04:46, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Thank you too

Thanks for the message of good-will you left on my talk page. I agree, bickering gets us nowhere. For that reason, I'm content to leave the POV template off the page. The main thing is to bring the article up to standards, and now the process seems to have begun. I hope you didn't misundertand me -- Phish was, in my pov, the best band of all time. It's hard not to use hyperbole when talking about them. The music itself was hyperbolic! Anyway, I'm glad you're on board with the standards thing. Psora 21:48, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Racial Slur

How is "cake-eater" a racial slur? What race is it a slur against? Are you one of those uptight people who can't understand humor?  :) Also if you're going to reply, do so on my talk page, not the user page. Pfalstad 03:48, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

You were just joking too? Well, you fooled me real good.  :) I live in Edina, actually. To upload an image, go to the toolbox on the left side of the screen, and click "Upload file". See Wikipedia:Uploading_images for how to include it in an article. For vandalism, you could try Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism. I don't really know. Pfalstad 15:35, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Re : Various Mills

Hi Gephart,

All done! My apologies for the oversight.

- Best regards, Mailer Diablo 07:47, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Phish article

<quote> Hey, im just getting to the Phish article now. I am starting to read over it, remove POV and things that have no sources or proof. I have two questions for you, how do you revert to a last edit, and how do you know if the current version is the 'live' one? Also, what are sock puppets. Thanks and best regards!--Gephart 01:25, 5 November 2005 (UTC) </quote>

To revert, go to the history page, click on the time/date of the version you want to revert to, then "edit this page", then "save page." It's a good idea to put something like rv to the last version by [[User:Username|Username]], or in this case rv disruption of cleanup in the edit summary, so people know what's going on. You can tell if the current version is not the 'legit' one by looking at the main page and noticing that it's the old version. For one thing it won't have the cleanup tag at the top. Also, if it's the old version, the first line will say "...noted for its technical prowess..." You can also go the the history page and "compare selected versions." That will show you what's been changed. It should be clear whether the changes were in good faith or just a blanket revert to the old version. So during a revert war, which is what we've got here, you should always revert to the 'legit' version, if neccessary, before making any edits. A sock puppet is the same person editing under different user names or ip addresses. Hope this helps. Psora 15:36, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi Gephart. I'm glad to see you're enjoying yourself on Wikipedia. But I'd like to take a second to let you know that saying things like "shut the fuck up" really isn't okay. Wikipedia has strong policies that require everyone to be be civil to one another and avoid personal attacks. You don't have to agree with everybody, but debate, don't attack; editors do get banned for running afoul of this policy. Also, you suggested that because you were at a Phish show, you should be able to say in the article that someone was "wasted." I'd encourage you to review Wikipedia's policies on no original research. That essentially means that an encyclopedia can't source things based on one person's opinions, because they can't be verified. We can't ask people coming to an encyclopedia, who expect it to be professionally accurate, to just take an editor's word for it. Make sense? Let me know if you have any questions and have fun, but please do be careful about the way you talk to people. · Katefan0^(scribble) 15:17, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

I wasn't criticizing you, I was pointing out a policy to you that I thought you perhaps were not aware of. At any rate, I apparently was mistaken about your opinions (I thought you were the one who wanted to put that information in the article), so I am glad I was wrong on that score. But, there was nothing "threatening" in the rather polite message I left above, save reminding you that civility and avoiding personal remarks are serious policies here on Wikipedia that you should be careful to adhere to (and the same goes for everyone). I have no personal interest in Phish, I came to the article when I read a plea for help on an administrator noticeboard about someone changing the article against consensus and without discussion. Notifyig you of Wikipedia policies is not "intimidating" you or threatening you; I just wanted to make sure you understood the policies and their consequences. · Katefan0^(scribble) 20:32, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm really glad to hear it and look forward to seeing your work. Again if I can help let me know. · Katefan0^(scribble) 22:10, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Ferris wheel

Hey there! I just wanted to follow up on this edit here which you made to the article Ferris wheel. Was there something in particular that you wanted to do to the article? It's sort of odd to place delete tags right in the middle of one, so I was wondering if there was something I could do to help you out. --HappyCamper 03:51, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Deleting a section? I've never heard of such a tag...if you find one, let me know!! (I don't think we admins can actually delete sections though.) In the meantime, why not use the talk page instead? Remove the material you think is irrelevant to the article, and paste that text on the talk page and leave a message there. That way, you can collaborate with other editors so that they also know what your resoning is. Hope this helps!--HappyCamper 11:44, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Twin towns

I never said that there were many more twin towns, that was part of what I was quoting. I was objecting to the inclusion of non-provable assertions. pomegranate 22:17, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Minnetonkites

Have you really heard people use that term? I haven't, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything.. The guy who originally put it there also wrote something about "rich assholes who spend all day on their boats" so I don't trust him.. Pfalstad 03:42, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I-94

Actually, I said the I-94 article was not long enough, and yes it was a joke, making fun of someone claiming it was too long. I could also have said, "But so is the highway itself", or better yet, "Feel free to edit it", but I reckon they just want to point out trouble, and try to get someone else to do the work. In fact, I don't see where it's too long, although the list of interchanges in great depth but for only 2 states seems odd. It should either be completed, removed, or just maybe some highlights. In fact, I was thinking of posting the Minneapolis-St. Paul interchanges, since I've driven through them quite a few times since moving here. Wahkeenah 05:28, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

TLG

Just listened to a live Tea Leaf Green concert recording from a few months ago; they're great! I'll definitely see them in concert if I get the chance, as they have a very good sound. I think it would be reasonable to suspect that they'll become more popular in the coming years and draw larger crowds. Or maybe they will remain small, known only to close fans? I would go with the former, but I guess we'll have to see. Thanks for the recommendation! --Muugokszhiion 22:20, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Lowry Hill Tunnel

Directions are never proper nouns; capitalizing them is shite style. "Heading" is also not a proper noun. "North/west" is an accurate description, as it is compass north and signage west. --SPUI (talk | don't use sorted stub templates!) 07:20, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

About my username

No, I do not snort cocaine, and I feel offended. My screen name was taken by a quote by a competeor on Most Extreme Elimination Challenge who said "Nose nuggets". I usually have it as a name with a "z" in nose, but Wikipedia did not recognise my spelling, hence the normal spelling. NoseNuggets 4:41 US EST Jan 2 2006

Herb Brooks

Hi, Gepart. You asked why I thought the Herb Brooks article should have sections and here is my reply. I don't think it's so short of an article that it not have sections. It isn't a stub and it will probably be expanded further given it's notoriety. I will concede that sections are not required, but they are recommended. Also, there is a consensus recommendation that the lead section of articles be used for a paper version of wikipedia. - ApolloCreed 22:48, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Barnstars

Try a look at the examples here...Wikipedia:Barnstars as that provides a number of options for you as far as "Barnstars".--MONGO 08:52, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Phish

Hey, Gephart. Thanks for the returned comment. I appreciate the words. You're mostly correct. I'm sure I won't understand ENTIRELY what they were all about, or however you want to put it. Shows have been to described to be, but I realize the experience my family has had with Phish will never completely sink into my soul. About that Blues thing, I understand what you mean. I have played piano since I was five years old, and I am very very passionate about it. When I fool around and diddle with my own tunes, I can see how Blues can be incorporated.

Just do me a favor, in case we talk again: Don't say I don't know "NOTHING, NOTHING!!!" I'm an old soul, cat. I may not know everything, but don't drop down a few levels to talk to me.

By the way, I've seen all of the Seinfeld episodes, too. I am a walking script. No HBO for me, so I have only seen the 4th season of Larry David (on DVD.)

69.1.133.115 20:29, 23 February 2006 (UTC)TommyBoy76

Edina article

Did you read my response on the talk page? You have not given me any sources that show Carl Pohlad lives in Edina. The source you cited shows that he lives in Minneapolis. It says: "Pohlad is 88 widowed, and lists Minneapolis as his home." Not Edina. Pfalstad 22:18, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Re:Dakota Bar and Grill

Hello! Thanks for asking such a good question about developing pages. If you have an idea for an article about a notable subject but don't want to create a stub then have it criticised and edited by all and sundry under the terms of the GFDL, then there is a solution. You can create your own sandbox to write, edit and otherwise develop articles, free from the interference of other editors. The instructions for doing so are quite easy to follow and I would be happy to go through them with you when you have read the page.

I notice that no one has taken the time to give you a welcome to Wikipedia, even though you have been here for quite some time. I will append the welcome template to this message as it contains links to articles that give lots of helpful advice about creating and editing WP pages. I trust that you will not see this as patronising and if you know all about the information in the articles already then I apologise. I find it helpful to refer to them in the course of editing.

Welcome!

Hello, Gephart/Archive1, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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:Questions, 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!   (aeropagitica)  22:28, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Archivals

Hey there - thanks for dropping by! Come to think of it, I should archive my talk page. There is this page which you might find useful - I essentially do "permanent link archiving". I haven't seen my method of archiving frequently on Wikipedia, probably because it is quite time consuming. What I do is the following:

1. When I want to archive, I take all my posts, paste them in notepad, group all the related subjects together, and wikify it a little bit so the posts look organized.
2. In a single edit, I rearrange my talk page the way I want the archives to look like. I add a little "welcome to my archives" header a the top. Just a few short sentences.
3. Then, I save the page.
4. Then, I go into the page history and get the permanent link to the archive.
5. Then, I blank the entire talk page, and add the permanent link to the top. At this point, you are done!

It takes a very long time to do, largely because of the refactoring.

If you need a hand in anything, just let me know! Feel free to browse through my archives anytime - it might give you a few ideas on how to organize your own pages. Each one of them is laid out slightly differently.

Some other users archive like this:

1. The move their talk page to a subpage, say /Archive1.
2. Then, they just go back to their old talk page, and start all over.

You can see there are advantages to the latter method! I do not do this because I think it just creates more clutter. The link I gave you above elaborates on this point a bit more. This user uses the latter archival method.

Anyway, if you need a hand with anything, just let me know! I'm curious - how did you know I was around? I don't think we have met on Wikipedia before. In any case, I'm glad to have met you! You might also find this place a fun project to participate in too. --HappyCamper 13:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Deleting articles

Regarding your question, "Can non-admins delete articles that have been started?", the short answer is no but you can request an article's deletion through the deletion process. Check out Wikipedia:Guide to deletion, Wikipedia:Speedy deletions, and Wikipedia:Deletion policy for more info.

Cheers, DoubleBlue (Talk) 18:03, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Image copyrights

I'm concerned about your use of the {{CopyrightedFreeUse}} copyright tag on your images, yet having statements like "DO NOT use without explicit consent!", so I've added a note at Wikipedia:Copyright problems#Others. I hope that there can be a balance between your desired use of the photos and the aims of Wikipedia where material is generally intended to be redistributable. —Mulad (talk) 20:26, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Greetings, Gephart. The images you have uploaded to Wikipedia are beautiful, but I'm concerned that you have stated they can not be used without your permissions. By uploading your images to Wikipedia, you are specifically giving permission to everyone to reproduce your images under the terms of the GFDL. If you do not agree to those terms, your images will unfortunately have to be deleted. Please let me know what should be done about this. All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 21:48, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for writing back. It's no problem, I'll take care of it. I'm glad we can still use the pictures! – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 22:44, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Redirects

Wikipedia:Redirect and Help:Redirect explain how to make and edit redirects in more detail than you'll care to remember. Henning Makholm 02:18, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Squirethatisbrickandred.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Squirethatisbrickandred.JPG. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Image legality questions page. Thank you. -SCEhardT 04:42, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Uwobs.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Uwobs.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.