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.

February 2011

Utopia, Limited poster

I have an ethical objection to the behaviour of several admins on commons, who support a certain racist troll, and do not want to ever contribute to the site again because of that. As Utopia, Limited is primarily of interest to English speakers, there's little need for it to be there. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 01:04, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Why should the file not be moved to Commons because of some admins there? Would you like the file to be kept here as well, or do you think the file should absolutely not be moved to Commons? (added after seeing additions) Actually, the Italian Wikipedia has the old version of the file; I'd say that regardless of issues like those you have (or lesser dislikes that editors like myself have) Commons is pretty useful in its role. —innotata 01:12, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just don't feel I can support a project that has institutionalized racism and harassment, to the point of blocking people for complaining about it. Maybe when the Augean stables are cleaned, but Ihave a wole gallery of things ( http://adamcuerden.deviantart.com/gallery/ [There's a few things on there that are revised from my previous work for Wikipedia, but it's mostly entirely new]) that I am unwilling to upload precisely because of Commons being, well, a cesspool of immorality, so this is a long-standing unwillingness. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 11:06, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just for an exampl: I'd love for http://adamcuerden.deviantart.com/gallery/#/d32aw9u to be used on Wikipedias; it's far better than anything that's available here. But I cannot encourage such use, as that would allow the racist trolls at Commons to be supported, and complete blacklisting of that site is now the only ethical option in my mind. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 11:13, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For the record: Pieter Kuiper, and his cheerleader MGA73. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 11:15, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. I want to support teachers and educators. But I can't support that if it means, at the same time, giving tacit support to some of the worst behaviour I've seen on the internet (which is saying something); a core of rotten in Commons that has festered and grown worse over the five years I moniytored itm, until the onlyy principled decision left to me was to leave. If you have a better solution, I'm open.

Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 11:23, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't quite what to do, and I think I'll just leave this as it is (maybe upload on it.wiki), at least until your issues are in some way resolved. I was quite unaware of the major dispute you had with Kuiper; if you are asking for a better solution for what to do on Commons, I'm not a good person to ask, but I'll say that I think I personally would keep on contributing and disengage even if admins were doing what they're doing on Commons—though I'm not easily offended, even by behaviour like Kuiper's, which seems only rather rude to me. I don't see why the file can't be moved to Commons by myself, with perhaps the local copy kept, but after seeing you remove my query on your talk page and a similar query, I think I'll leave this alone right now. —innotata 22:55, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That situation's festered for years;; It's more than just one incident. I tried that stratey, but now feel that further work on Commons would be tantmount to supporting a poisonous culture. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 03:11, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tokyo.jpg

Hi, I got a message from you about an unclear copyright status of File:Tokyo.jpg. I had a look at it and saw that copyright status was clearly stated: PD with source. I invite you to have a look again and come back again if there are any more questions. Thank you. Ben ^T/_C 12:43, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the file from, beyond the base link? There is no source information that can determine copyright. Who is the author? This needs to be given if the author released the copyright. —innotata 17:28, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've found and added the correct information now, and moved the file to Commons. The link to the information page (which I couldn't find earlier), and that the file is a work of the CIA should have been included earlier. —innotata 16:32, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Islamic Center of Greater Toledo OH.jpg

Hello Innotata, @File:Islamic Center of Greater Toledo OH.jpg: At the source there is explicity stated "Photo by Mike Sharp" and not "2old". However it is not clear who the Mike Sharp is. Can you find out who he is? If he is the uploader it is fine.. but that is not clear. Answer at Commons please. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 02:52, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. Well, okay - if all his pics are with this name we can assume this is he. Maybe you can add such a note at the "source" field in the description.

If you think he is trustworthy it is okay for me.

By the way: why do you not want messages at Commons? You are quite often in Commons, aren't you? Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:26, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any reason not to trust him: he has a lot of uploads said to be own work, and by Mike Sharp, and is a pretty trusted user on Wikitravel, apparently. I prefer having all my messages at one place, and on any projects other than here, I might not check all the time (although I'm coming to on Commons, especially since I want to watch a lot of pages). —innotata 16:03, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay - fine then. Have a good day! Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 17:15, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 2011

Got review?

U.S. state reptiles, up for FLC. TCO (talk) 05:33, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Islas Malvinas Coins

Hello Innotata, you were right about the copyright status of those coins. I have answered in the Deletion request. --Banfield - Amenazas aquí 02:04, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removing "do not move to commons" tags

I just noticed that File:Tupolev HQ on the Yauza, Moscow.jpg, which was already deleted on commons for violating so-called "copyright" and then reuploaded to en-wiki with {{do not copy to commons}}, was ... right, copied to commons. Because at some time in January [1] you removed the {{do not copy to commons}} warning with a misleading edit summary ("not what {{do not move to commons}} covers (PD in US, but not source) and nothing else to indicate can't be moved" - have you actually seen the photo in question?) - starting another round of deletions. I restored the warning at en-wiki. NVO (talk) 03:32, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing explained how it was not public domain in its source country, and public domain in the U. S. If freedom of panorama is the issue and the building is in copyright in its source country, it is in copyright as a foreign work in the U. S.; so presumably if it can't be on Commons, it can't be on enwiki. At least right now, works that are PD in the U.S. but not their source country is all the tag refers to. —innotata 17:52, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a question of real-world laws here or there. It's a made-up house rule of commons: no buildings from this country. Don't ask me why. Some immortals there give a benefit of doubt to older buildings, others propose burning everything starting with prehistoric megaliths (cf. this proposal). They call it "freedom of panorama". It's a game - a thousand images are allowed but one of a thousand is picked for deletion (which was precisely the case with this file). Last time I checked here Lupo gave me an advice: "upload under the free license of the photographer's choice ..." (scroll to the very last paragraph) so it was acceptable then, at least for some. I really don't care much about this file, but I'd hate to hear another person from en-wiki asking me to upload it to en-wiki, again. NVO (talk) 20:23, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the panoramafreiheit situation in Russia is not entirely clear, and I've experienced nonsense with no connection to actual copyright laws from a few respected quarters on Commons, but I'm not sure whether to believe you. If the looks are that Russian law holds that the building is copyrighted, surely there is no reason to keep the files here but not on Commons. —innotata 01:16, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I didn't read what you linked in full then. I didn't know about the application of the URAA Lupo sees, and I thought that the URAA makes copyright applicable to anything that would be copyright in its source country…and maybe that's so. Tricky, but at any rate, there should be some explanation on the file of what we know for now, and {{Do not move to Commons}} refers to something different and specific as far as I can tell. —innotata 01:21, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unidentified Sparrow

Hello innotata, on the French Wikipedia we'd like to have a confirmation for the identification of the bird on this picture. I suggest Passer griseus, but you should be more qualified ;) By the way, I saw you've talked about this illustration of the Saxaul Sparrow with Shyamal, ~~and I also found this one for the Desert Sparrow on this website, but without the author... if you have an idea.~~ actually it's Dresser too, I will import it as soon as possible. One last thing, maybe your Birds project could be interseted by this kind of galeries : Dresser, Gould, Keulemans... Regards, Totodu74 (talk) 21:12, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The photo was taken in Addo Elephant National Park, South Africa, so it is a Southern Grey-headed Sparrow, Passer diffusus/Moineau sud-africain, though nothing in its looks would strongly confirm this. Yes, the Oiseaux collection could be useful, but there isn't that much information, and indeed not enough to be very comfortable about using many of the images. For example, Shyamal says Dresser was not an artist, but can't be sure of the illustrator of the Saxaul Sparrow image. For my part, I find most of the old illustrations I add on the Internet Archive and Biodiversity Heritage Library, where they are in texts (which also can be used as sources often). —innotata 01:17, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dresser also has a Spanish Sparrow pair, Gould House Sparrows and a Tree Sparrow together, and a Spanish Sparrow that doesn't look much like anything and that I suspect might not have originally been supposed to be such, as well as a copy of an illustration we already have (File:PasserHispaniolensisGould.jpg); and with these I'd like more information on their source. Anyhow, I've uploaded the photo to File:Passer diffusus Addo Elephant National Park.jpg —innotata 01:39, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help ! As I said, I've imported File:PasserSimplexDresser.jpg, and I'll search from where it comes. If you really want to know, I could send a mail to the webmaster of Oiseaux.net. I also use archive.org (Biodiversity Heritage Library oftenly reuses it). For example I have in my to-do list this book on Madagascar fauna (drawings by Steendr. v. P.W.M. Trap ?). No sparrow, but lemurs (for Visionholder) and 30 plates of birds... It takes time but we can't let this unexploited

Totodu74 (talk) 10:16, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if the people at Oiseaux.net will know, or if they'll say: it looks like they tagged their reproductions as copyright. I've posted to Shyamal again on the source, since I found the index to the book the illustrations most likely come from. For the Madagascar book, it looks like "Steendr. v. P. W. M. Trap" is the engraver (you probably know more about European company names, to confirm that it is a firm), and the illustrations are signed, "I C K" or something like that (I'd find a clearer apparent signature). Actually, the BHL has all its texts on the Internet Archive, but it's easier to find and get them from the BHL in most cases, and you can search (OCR) by systematic name etc., which is useful. —innotata 16:40, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I have not seen your response. For "Steendr. v. P. W. M. Trap", I have absolutely no idea of what it could be - Moreover it sound German or Dutch of wich I know nothing. =/ Totodu74 (talk) 10:49, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's certainly Dutch (actually, the book was published by a publisher my mother has worked for), but I'm not quite sure what it means. On which page does it say "Steendr. v. P. W. M. Trap"? Ucucha 00:20, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I found it. "Steendr." stands for "steendrukkerij", an archaic Dutch term for a firm doing lithography. It's the lithography firm of one P. W. M. Trap. That is Pieter Willem Marinus Trap, who died in 1905. Ucucha 00:24, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Ja, I thought it would be something very like that; compare itto the captions on File:Black-headed Sibia (1903) by Herbert Goodchild.jpg, which engraved was by the firm of the Mintern Brothers. We still don't know who the illustrator is, though there should be an illustration with a clearer signature. —innotata 00:31, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well done, I start to upload drawings with the name of the firm instead of author. Thank both of you for your help. Totodu74 (talk) 12:40, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Nicolls

Thankyou so much for the valuable and greatly appreciated assistance with English language and editing skills. I am neither a professional historian nor a computer programmer-though perhaps I might correctly be described as an "impatient and blustering" learner. I apologize for the unneccessary labors that my lack of sandbox skills may have caused you and other editors.

A Swiss citizen and national (my paternal grandmother was an Irish girl named Sullivan), I am aware of the fact that my English may be wanting at times. I have edited another short Wiki article about the British Royal Marines officer, (Sir) James Malcolm KCB (1767-1849), who was the older brother of the British Admiral (Sir) Pulteney Malcolm mentioned in the Nicolls article. Have attempted to contribute to the Arbuthnot and Ambrister incident and to the Seminole Wars articles as well. If collaborators can put up with me, I hope to be around for a while.

As a younger man I lived in the United States and served in the United States Marine Corps as an officer.....but that may be irrelevant to why I am here.

I am interested in editing or contributing articles in both French and English. Right now I am studying shortcuts that might help convince the editors of the Seminole Wars article that their "Major Edward Nicholls" was our Edward Nicolls. I think that it is an example of subject matter that can help students climb outside the narrow and nationalistic "founding myth" agendas which flavor popular history but contaminate objective scholarship. Even if one posits that everything is subjective, my preferences lean toward dialogue rather than to liturgical recitals which are to be left untouched and unexplored.....

Thankyou again, (USMarine51, a.k. a.)/=(Anacharsis51 20:38, 20 March 2011 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by USMarine51 (talk • contribs)

It looks like other editors on the Seminole Wars article have just undone your addition of duplicate links and unreferenced information. "MOS" refers to Wikipedia's "manual of style", which is mostly not arbitrary or anything and easy to look through by topic. I now see I probably should have pointed out some Wikipedia technical info, policies, guidelines, and norms, and shared my opinion from researching Nicolls's article with you; I see now that there are a great deal of things to point out, these are a few. On technical issues, you seem to have the most problems with formatting references (especially the "<ref>" tags): this isn't all that complicated, and you can see Wikipedia:Citing sources for all the relevant information. Maybe you'd like to read about the aim of Wikipedia: for that I'd start at Wikipedia:About; for one thing you've been adding a few things that can't be verified. It doesn't look like you've contributed to the French Wikipedia, which is at fr.wikipedia.org, where you should have an account created when you view it if you are logged in here. Last, you should only have one account (see Wikipedia:Sock puppetry), though I think you just need to stop using your previous one. For other useful informational pages, I found the links on welcome message Template:WelcomeMenu useful as a new user, and the "Help" tab on the left of the Wikipedia interface is also a good place to start. If you have anything more specific to ask about, please do ask me, any other user you've noticed, or at the Help desk. And by the way, Wikipedia isn't so much about expertise, and I don't know much about the relevant historical subjects either—on Wikipedia I contribute mostly to articles on birds. I'll ask or tell you about my changes to your edits to clarify what I'm doing now, and look forward to working with you on these articles more. —innotata 22:23, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image permissions

I have sent an email with the permissions in regards to those images you mentioned on my talk page, if you find anymore needing attention that I can help with please dont hesitate to ask. Cheer ZooPro 08:25, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thx

thx! (but the order was correct: Deutsch, Diné bizaad) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 21:14, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, there are two different orders in use on the English Wikipedia: by the native name's standard translation, and alphabetically by the name used in the web address (which puts Diné bizaad in N). I'm not sure if caecilian consistently used either; I personally prefer the second one and may have standardised it to that perviously. —innotata 23:52, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

notforcommons vs. Keeplocal

Perhaps, but there's a huge difference between a template that says "Do not upload to commons" and "Please upload to commons, but keep a local copy." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam Cuerden (talk • contribs) 19:56, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ja, I notice that the template was changed recently. I don't hate commons, but I don't think the changes after the merger of the two templates (NoCommons and KeepLocal) were justified. Still, wouldn't it be better to have KeepLocal on there, so that it isn't placed with such things as seized Nazi photos? —innotata 01:00, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...You're really going down the Nazi route? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 01:32, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, forgot what Nazis in internet discussions are usually associated with ... I've been looking through transclusions of the template, and most of them are NARA Nazi photos, there being so many it is hard to find those that should be switched to {{PD-US-1923-abroad}}—most of the rest. —innotata 01:36, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Saw your tweaks to the template. I'd think we should change {{KeepLocal}}, since your images are very different from, well, the Nazi ones. The images on {{Do not move to Commons}} show that its aim has been rather different: a no-copyright symbol and a U.S. flag. —innotata 01:50, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here are 5 recently-uploaded files by me that cannot lose the Notforcommons tag. I wish you'd stop acting as if that template contaminates the file it's attached to. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 01:59, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I don't think you should be doing this. I can see why you don't want to contribute to Commons, but I'm not sure you should upload images that could be there and that would be good for Wikipedia to have there with your requests. In owning the copyright but releasing it under an—irrevocable—free license, you can only request that it not be placed on any websites, and the images can only be kept off Commons by courtesy. I think I should bring this up at a central discussion page, but I'll wait for your reply, and also I won't be on Wikipedia for a bit.

For your last comment: What do you mean? I don't think the template contaminates, I think the most specific template should be used, as with article cleanup tags. —innotata 02:05, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And for those you mentioned the template certainly does apply, but this has about nothing to do with your request to keep images that can be on Commons. It also applies to the Nazi images: that is all that they have to do with this; I brought them up since they are an example of an odd copyright case and useful images, like the sound files you linked above. —innotata 02:09, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quite simply, I think it would be unethical to contribute my work to Commons until the problems there are solved, lest I be seen as supporting racism and bullying. So my options are either to not let Wikipedia have my work at all, or to upload it where I can, and restrict it. I would prefer the second option, but will go back to the first if I have to.

I don't see why you seem so insistent on making me unable to contribute images to Wikipedia at all. I've avoiding uploading images for months because of the situation, and literally the moment I do, you start harassing me for not putting it up on Commons, where, as you are fully aware, I refuse to edit. If this had gone well, I'd have been uploading other things, but if I'm just going to get harassed if I so much as try to contribute them to Wikipedia with a request, I'm not going to bother anymore, and solely upload things which I have had no hand in restoring. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 02:52, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am concerned since you are not just refusing to edit on Commons in what I personally think is a bad response to real issues, but that you are making it seem that there is more reason not to move the images you have contributed than their actually is, by confusing the template system. I'm not trying to convince you to let the images be moved right now; I just think you need to identify why you object to having them moved without confusing things. —innotata 19:17, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hence why the template now clearly gives the reason. However, this started with you changing it to a template saying that it should be moved to commons, then comparing my work to Nazis. Ask me again in a week, when I'm less likely to do a knee-jerk reaction because of that, with a viable suggestion for how to mark things. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 21:57, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, if you like. I jsut used the NARA images since I had been cleaning up the description pages etc. for them just then; I think the {{KeepLocal}} template probably should be changed, as I've said. —innotata 21:59, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stub templates

Hi,

Thanks for your refinements to some food articles to which I'd made some small improvements.

I have a question about the placement of stub templates. On the one hand, the convention seems to be to place them after categories. On the other hand, they are displayed in the list of categories in the order they're listed (with the stub notice at the bottom of the article, regardless). It seemed cleaner to me to place the stubs templates in alpha order amongst the categories, so everything is sorted. If I'm out of line in doing so, I need to go back to some other food articles and change those, too.

Thanks in advance for your advice, and thanks again for your efforts.

Cheers, JoeSperrazza (talk) 15:09, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think placing them two rows below categories is correct, since tools like AWB do so. This presumably is for reasons of appearance. —innotata 15:12, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick feedback. BTW, food categories are sometimes a challenge. There's a lack of consistency from article to article within a group of related articles. I've recently tried to correct those (see Category:British pies, for example - although those are where I need to go fix the stub locations, per your comment). British cuisine vs. English cuisine is another area of inconsistency in application. Good catch on Manx cuisine for bloaters - I misapplied that. I did go add Manx cuisine to Kippers, as it was missing there. Cheers, JoeSperrazza (talk) 15:17, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. On a totally non-build-the-encyclopedia note, I find Buckling (fish) better than Kippers, and both much, much tastier than Bloater (herring) (too gamey for me). All three are nearly impossible to get in Denver. I miss them for breakfast! - JoeSperrazza (talk) 15:21, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a lot of inconsistency in food categories all right. I've only eaten kippers, and I only created the bloater article to split it from a strange species of freshwater whitefish with the same name, Coregonus hoyi. —innotata 15:25, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011

ml language

Thank you for your note about what the ml language is. Please see further comments at "Bird 1131". Snowman (talk) 10:47, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia_Diskussion:Botschaft#Copyright_coin_images

Hallo Innotata, I would like to deal with your note at de:Wikipedia_Diskussion:Botschaft#Copyright_coin_images but it is not clear to me. If I have a look at the rule pages in Commons all images you have listed seem to be copyrighted. But you seem to mean that some are not?! Could you please clarify / rephrase at dewp? :-) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 23:44, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Answered. You do not need to notify me. Thanks anyway. :-) Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 00:19, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

KeepLocal vs. Notforcommons

Perhaps a custom template would be best? Mind, there's very few works that would use it. If I don't label something, you can presume it can be moved to commons, I suppose. Though if it's featured (or recent), could you throw up a {{KeepLocal}}? Commons can be really random with deletions sometimes. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 10:15, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what other people will think, but if you're going to ask that images be kept here, you might as well make a template (in your user space, I presume). —innotata 13:19, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Saxaul Sparrow

Hello

I translated your article on Saxaul Sparrow in French and a reader pointed out to me that you write

At 14–16 cm (5½–6¼ in) and 25–27 grams (0.88–0.95 oz), it is among the larger sparrows. in the introduction then and 25–32 grams (0.88–1.12 oz).[2] in the description. Which is correct?

Thank you very much. Berichard (talk) 06:41, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The second one. It's from Summers-Smith 2009, the first from Summers-Smith 1988. —innotata 14:05, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Nicolls

Just wanted to let you know how much I appreciate the coaching and guidance in highlighting the modest place in history of someone like Edward Nicolls. As a former Marine myself, I am interested in deconstructing idols and national mythes. Edward Nicolls was a Bin-Laden-like bogey-man to some of the more self-righteous in 19th century America. He was a "British Chesty Puller", perhaps in some other corners of the world.....Nationalist or institutionalist sainthood is not what interests me.

Nicolls, a person with a taste for military glory, was an intelligent man with a view of the the world that seems both broad and narrow. Apparently unaware of the menacing ecological future faced by sea-turtles, or of the loss in short-term profits to British capital, Edward Nicolls risked his own life, health, and personal fortune in the struggle against both the Atlantic slave trade and slavery as it was known and practiced during the Victorian era.

At the same time he applied military discipline to freed fugitives from slavery and convicts deported from England as social outcasts. In an apparent effort to "jury-rig" an apprenticeship aiming not just at mere survival, but at social reconstruction and collective prosperity in the colonies as well.

Writing to Lord Bathhurst from Woolwich on the subject of New Zealand, Nicolls tried to make his case that it was in the interest of Britain to encourage, and promote the emigration of the impoverished Scots, Irish, and other Britons, as well as deported convicts, to New Zealand and Australia - rather than to the docks of New York and Philadelphia.

For all the faults of the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian Empires of yore, I am old enough to have heard nostalgia for the kinder, gentler and more human forms of imperialism that were perceived as preceding the present "New World Order" and "Globalization." Were I younger and smarter, I would enjoy elaborating on Nicolls as an example of the ideals of his era. Perhaps that has already been done?

I am of the opinion that the ideals of our own era are in need of a revision. Perhaps I suffer from the syndrome or disorder of being an "American-born Swiss with blustering Irish antecedents?"-USMarine51 21:11, 15 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by USMarine51 (talk • contribs)

Interesting maybe, but not what should go on Wikipedia, which is supposed to be an encyclopaedia written with neutral point of view and have no original research. —innotata 14:55, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Funchal statue A.jpg‎

Hello, I do not completely agree with the reason why you don't honored my request. There are like dozens of statues in Funchal, and "Statue A" is not, by any stretch of imagination, the name of that one. It's as meaningless as a name as naming something as "Funchal church". If it was coded with date or a number sequence, I wouldn't bother that much, but it's simply "Funchal statue A". Please answer me in Commons, as I seldom came here lately.--Darwinius (talk) 00:11, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For many variations of "meaningful" and "descriptive", that is. I consider naming the interior of a church in Lisbon as "Lisbon-01" as meaningless as if it was named DSC00708, and it doesn't describe nothing at all. In this case it says "Funchal statue", which is a little improvement, but still... Anyway, as it is not such grievous a case, I wouldn't bother too much about it. Thank's for the answer.--Darwinius (talk) 00:29, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

articles

Hello, Innotata. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Talk

What were you doing reverting my edits on my own talk page --In actu (talk) 18:43, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, pure accident, reverted myself right afterward. Clicked rollback on a log or something instead of an unrelated diff: now I'm trying to find rollback preferences for my .js —innotata 18:44, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I was wondering why the orange bar popped up due to the fact that the redirect prevents that. --In actu (talk) 18:48, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Tar

Are you asking me to do something or are you going to do it yourself?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:48, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand the request, but I am fairly certain that you can not move sound files like you can articles.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:24, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where is Jack Tar?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:35, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know where else it belongs, but I included it at List of compositions by John Philip Sousa.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:51, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Diptendu Pramanick

You removed the photo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TheModernReview_1935Jan_DP.jpg to Commons without notifying me. Now the photo does not appear in the article. Plz revert.SP 04:05, 26 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pramanick (talk • contribs)

The photo still appears in the article, at least for me, and I think you know Commons images can be shown on Wikipedia. —innotata 22:34, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.