User talk:Briantist/archive4

see also User talk:Briantist/archive3 User talk:Briantist/Archive2 User talk:Briantist/archive1

Hitchhiker's Guide

Ok, look. An overview of the whole of the media franchise that is HGTTG can be viewed at the article The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, right? From there, each of the various media that it has been adapted to has its own article. For example, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (TV series), The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (book), The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (computer game), and so on and so forth. Each of these articles is about that particular TV series, novel, game, etc. - and ONLY that. That is why each of their opening sentences have 'is'. It simply makes no sense to begin any of these articles with 'began as' or 'continued as' or 'the final iteration of HGTTG is' because those articles have nothing to do with the other media, they're only addressing one part of the franchise, so there is no need to provide context of that sort. Do you understand? --84.65.21.21 11:43, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I do... and I understand the concept of chronology as well. Perhaps you could find it in your heart to learn a little of the English language? You are in the UK after all If you want to argue, please get a usename too, don't hide behind your IP address, oh Energis domestic user.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 12:06, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Why are you being so defensive? That kind of talk isn't necessary.

Anyway, you haven't addressed my point: simply the fact that the radio series is chronologically first does not mean the article can be introduced the way you want to, because the article concerns itself with the radio series and has nothing to do with the other adaptations. The correct way to write the article would be: "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a radio series", and then later on you can write as an incidental: "it has been adapted into various forms, such as book, TV, game etc.".

By the way, I am right, and if you still don't agree, I can get in a third opinion to prove it... --84.65.21.21 16:29, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, get one.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 18:44, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

And while you are at it get one on the word "franchise" as I think you'll find that is wrong too....  BRIANTIST  (talk) 18:45, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Please do not attack other editors, which you did here: User talk:Briantist. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. _TheIslander 15:56, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Attack??? Editor??? Where???  BRIANTIST  (talk) 16:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Come on, you must be joking. That message replaces what I considered an attack. To you, it may be 'banter', or something similar; to me it's an attack. And before you ask, I went to a comprehensive, so I don't even have a POV slant on the matter ;) _TheIslander 16:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

It's you that must be joking my friend. Please tell me which words I have use consitute an "attack"? It seems to me that you must be suffering from a serious "chip on the shoulder" if you take offense so easily... I've been a professional writer for some twenty years now and so I'm always mystyfied by people who read more into things than exist. Please can you explain to me carefully please which words you are refering to which are an "attack"??? Please.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 16:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

While you are at it, please explain how the "whining child" post to me isn't an attack on me? Should I be taking offense?  BRIANTIST  (talk) 17:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

You're quite right, it's just as bad. I'd have acted on it at the same time if I'd noticed. Your comment "Did you go to a Grammar skool perhaps?" is just not on, whatever you say. I'm not going to argue with you: I've seen you try and explain your way out of attacks before (here), so I'm not going to bother. _TheIslander 17:15, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks... I think. I can't belive all this typing over two characters!  BRIANTIST  (talk) 17:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

BTW, are you the Wikipedia:Third opinion? Also, was 84.65.21.21 "an editor"?  BRIANTIST  (talk) 17:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Nope, I'm not the third opinion. As for 84.65.21.21, any contributor can be called an editor - they're interchangeable terms. _TheIslander 17:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

But I did go to a grammar school! :D --84.65.21.21 18:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

One where they taught you to not register and call people "a whining child"? Nice.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 18:41, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Never said you were one, just you sound like one. Comment on content, not the contributor, that's the ticket. --84.65.21.21 15:09, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

"Assume good faith" - that means you - the one who wrote "you sound like a whining child. " Please see hypocrite  BRIANTIST  (talk) 07:07, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, could I suggest that you both cool down and step away from the keyboard? 'Else one or other of you will probably rise up the warnings soon and get a block. The third opinion has come, given judgement - just leave it now. _TheIslander 08:55, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Fine by me.. I prefer to contribute, not argue. I do loads of it normally, but I don't really feel like it when I get attacked... It's not so much fun doing all the graphics work or taking photos to illustrate things when you get attacked over five bytes!  BRIANTIST  (talk) 11:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I was only kidding. --84.65.21.21 16:07, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Third Opinion

Okay, I've read the arguments. I feel that since there is a separate article dealing with the franchise, this article, about the radio series should begin with "is a", not "began as". If this was a narrative which included the other ventures in the franchise, then absolutely. Otherwise, as this article deals exclusively with the radio series, "is a" is preferred.--Dali-Llama 18:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Dalillama. That's exactly what I said. Do you accept this Briantist? --84.65.21.21 18:16, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Understand? Yeah. Agree? No. Am I going to waste any more time with an unregistered user? No.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 18:40, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Brighton Railway development.gif

I like the image that you gave created here do you have a non-animated version of this image showing all of the lines on there as if they were all still running today?--Lucy-marie 21:59, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't have a non-animated version, but I can grab the frame for you if you like...  BRIANTIST  (talk) 08:23, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

It would be nice yes. Thanks for your help--Lucy-marie 13:30, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Here you go...

Many thanks--Lucy-marie 15:26, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Please re-register

Hello, Briantist! You are receiving this notice because the WikiProject BBC is attempting to determine which members are still active. As a result of this all people on the active members list are being asked to re-register.

To re-register please see Wikipedia:WikiProject BBC/Re-Registration.

If you do not re-register within 15 days of receiving this notice your name will be removed from the active members list and put onto the inactive members list (if for any reason you were unable to reply to this notice in time, you can just move your name back).

Boy1jhn 14:08, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Why not use "Show preview"?

I've just had the strange experience of updating the page Answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything at the same time as you were making a major edit of that page.

Assuming it was also you who updated the page using IP 86.133.178.65, then you made a total of over 140 edits in the space of two days! Assuming you and 86.133.178.65 are not the same person, then you made about 80 edits and 86.133.178.65 made about 60.

I'm still fairly new to Wikipedia, and have no idea what the official policy is, but this strikes me as a very non-optimal way to update a page. Why not use "Show preview", and save your updates every 15 minutes or so? That would reduce database load and make it much easier for other people to see what you've done and why. --RenniePet 20:37, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Simple, this Vista PC I am using keeps being suddenly unable to resolve DNS addresses without warning - this causes the loss of work! Also, I'm off looking for refs in books and other wikipedia pages, so I save what I am doing. Also, I'm editing sections at a time, not the whole page, so when I switch sections I have to save to get to another section. This stops edit conflicts with other users. The policy is Wikipedia:Be bold and Wikipedia:Ignore all rules!  BRIANTIST  (talk) 20:40, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, I'm used to using computer systems where one presses "save" every now and then (or gets it done for me.. even WordStar could manage that). There is no limits to the number of edits - only the differences are saved.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 20:41, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Also... it is impossible to check the 'ref's for a subsection are correct without saving and checking the whole thing.  BRIANTIST  (talk) 20:45, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Isn't Wikipedia terrible for collaborate editing, especially compared with Google Docs?  BRIANTIST  (talk) 20:48, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:New bbc two idents.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:New bbc two idents.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 02:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:893gulf fm.png

Image Copyright problem

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:893gulf fm.png. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:19, 6 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 18:19, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:New bbc two idents.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:New bbc two idents.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 05:15, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Brighton city transport website layout.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Brighton city transport website layout.png. 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 05:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:HitchHikersScriptsCover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:HitchHikersScriptsCover.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 05:03, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sky News New Colourscheme.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sky News New Colourscheme.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 09:35, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Fenchurch from TV Series.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Fenchurch from TV Series.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 03:34, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:HH caveman.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:HH caveman.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 03:41, 1 October 2007 (UTC)