User talk:Scoutersig/Archive 2006

Archive of User talk:Scoutersig comments from 2006.

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Scoutersig/Archive 2006, 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: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! -- T.o.n.y 15:05, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for help[edit]

Scouting: Camp Whitsett
I would like to add a page/file/link to "Camp Whitsett," which is now a little stub-segment in Scouting in California. I would like to make it, just for, you know, personal vanity and glory; but could someone help me find out how?? lol sheesh. Thanks. -Greg P.S. Also, I did not realize that there was a difference between "[]" symbols and "{}" symbols. Is there some litterature I can read about that?

Hi Greg! I'm not sure scouting camps are individually notable, so it might be best to just expand the information about "Camp Whitsett" in the Scouting in California article. However, you can read more about starting new pages at Wikipedia:New page. As for your second question, The "[[]]" makes a link and the "{{}}" includes a template. Wikipedia:Editing help has more info. I hope this helps! H e nrik 16:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scouting: Order of the Arrow by lodge/council in State
Yes. For more detail, see the local articles section of the Scouting Project's RulesStandards page at: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Scouting/RulesStandards#Local_articles_.28Councils_and_smaller_entities.29. Thanks for joining the project and helping! YIS, Rlevse 10:08, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Second/side page I want to add a page to my user page (you know, scoutersig/secondpage type) to showcase some maps. Erm, how do I do that?

Just go to the page and create it. User:Scoutersig/secondpage --pgk 18:21, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking Blockheads, AKA: Vandals Can I--a non-administrator--block repeated vandals? I'm having a hard time sifting through the wikipolicy. Am I allowed? I just got done (though he may strike again) multi-reverting a vandal at Galileo Galilei. Thanks.Scoutersig 16:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Only administrators have the technical ability to block vandals. However, if you come across a vandal who continues to vandalise after repeated warnings (i.e. after you've reached the {{subst:test4}} or at least {{subst:test3}} stage of warnings), you can go to WP:AIV and it's likely an admin will block them. --ais523 16:55, 27 November 2006 (U T C)

My signature is broken I tried to make a 'cool' signature like other people have, but it didn't work out so well, and after trying to make it return to normal... I have a signature that won't link to my page at all--it is just text. help! Scoutersig 18:13, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

If you clear the Signature box, and uncheck the Raw signature checkbox, everything should be fine. If that doesn't work, post back here with the contents of the Signature box and checkbox, and I'll try to help you further. —P^urple ^RA^IN 19:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you want help designing a signature, let me know what you're trying to do, and I'll see if I can help. —P^urple ^RA^IN 19:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This should be what you're looking for:

&mdash;[[User:Scoutersig|Scouter]][[User talk:Scoutersig|Sig]]

which looks like this: —Scouter Sig

The "Sig" part doesn't show up as a link on this page because it is a self-reference. On every other page it should be a link.

The — just inserts a line before the sig (like on mine). Feel free to remove it or replace it with just a hyphen if you like.

Make sure you have the Raw signature box checked when using this signature, or it won't work properly. —P^urple ^RA^IN 16:43, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paying attention[edit]

Hey, don't worry about it. That's how you find out what stuff does. :) --JiFish(^Talk/_Contrib) 11:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vincent van Gogh[edit]

Thanks for your note on the above and adding it to your watchlist. Let's see how we get on! Tyrenius 00:26, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grinbot's "hidden" link[edit]

Hello!

That link in cartography is an interwiki link, it builds up the language links in the left bottom box. The one in question linked to the sicilian language site. The bot's sole purpose is to update these links between the different languages - most bots around do just that.

Have a nice day! --grin ✎ 21:19, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

9/11 Jewish conspiracy[edit]

The history of that article says simple cut-and-paste from original/parent article. What article is the parent? It looks like it might have been 9/11 conspiracy theories. If it is, I speculate that the new article is redundant. --Midnightcomm 03:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like a split of 9/11 conspiracy theories. --Midnightcomm 03:50, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See my talk page. Thanks. Morton devonshire 20:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sigma Chi...[edit]

In Hoc Brother! Batman2005 00:55, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IHSV, Brother Scoutersig! Drsowell 18:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Current mac project collaboration[edit]

The current WP:MAC collaboration is Apple II family. Please devote some time to improve this article to featured status. — Wackymacs 14:00, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Disambiguation Talk Request[edit]

This is a form message being sent to all WikiProject Disambiguation participants. I recently left a proposed banner idea on the WikiProject Disambiguation talk page and I would appreciate any input you could provide. Before it can be approved or denied, I would prefer a lot of feedback from multiple participants in the project. So if you have the time please join in the discussion to help improve the WikiProject. Keep up the good work in link repair and thanks for your time. Nehrams2020 22:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gay kingdom flag[edit]

The Gay & Lesbaian Kingdom is a micronation, not a real country. It uses the rainbow flag. Their flag is already listed on the Wikipedia article page on micronation flags. If it is being listed on the national flags page it should definitely be removed. PS: It is a good idea to sign your comments so people know who you are. --Centauri 21:50, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that pretty much sums it up. --Gene_poole 02:24, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help[edit]

stealer! I spent so many hours on that box and now you take it and use it for your own evil designs! No, im kidding. Its cool. Post it on the new user boxes page so other people can use it. (You prob should reformat it though. Its outside of the normal boxes)--Samwisep86 23:44, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Reverts[edit]

You can install Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation_popups and use them for example. feydey 12:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Camp Whitsett[edit]

FYI. --evrik ^(talk) 16:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flag infobox on Gay and Lesbian Kingdom[edit]

Ah. I didn't notice that it added it to a category. I suppose it can easily be fixed by substing the template and editing out the category. _└ ^OzLawyer / _talk ^┐ 22:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All done. _└ ^OzLawyer / _talk ^┐ 22:20, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

David Beckham[edit]

Thank you for that hilarious edit summary! :-) -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 07:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

vandal[edit]

(copied)

User_talk:84.53.80.194 is at his vandalism again. Scoutersig 14:02, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have reported the ip here. Is there anything else that can be done? Rex the first ^{talk | contribs} 14:05, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose that, no, there isn't much else to be done. I just saw that you had berated him before, so I thought I'd notify some of the people who did that kind of thing. Thanks. Scoutersig 14:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion of edits on User:Gooku1bil[edit]

If you read what the page says, you will see that it specifically states NOT to revert any edits by me (211.28.235.242) to his page. you will note that he himself wrote that (check edit history).

The previous unsigned comment was left by an apparently unlogged-in User:Gooku1bil
Scoutersig 04:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Secession list[edit]

Looks good so far...I'd like to see a bit more about the context of the various movements. We already have a similar article for Canada; you can review it at Secessionist movements of Canada if you'd like to see how it's handled. For what it's worth, though, we treat internal new-provinces-from-existing-provinces secessions in a separate article at Proposals for new Canadian provinces and territories. Bearcat 19:07, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Scoutersig! Thanks for asking my advice. Did you notice that I replied on the list's talk page? — Sebastian (talk) 19:28, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I replied on User_talk:SebastianHelm#Secession work. Please let's keep the discussion together - your place or mine? ;-) — Sebastian (talk) 17:17, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign your posts[edit]

Hi there, I noticed that your edit to both WP:AIV and the user you reported were unsigned. Could you please remember to sign your posts on talk pages and project pages in future. Regards LittleOldMe 20:22, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

iTunes Images[edit]

If you look more closely at the article Microsoft Windows. You will see many 'icons' of various versions of the operating system throughout the article. For example the Windows Hybrid 16/32 and the Windows 16 bit OS sections both have icons for those versions. The [Microsoft_Windows#History|Windows History]] section also has the icon for Windows 2001. Note this is all the same article. I should also point out that Microsoft Windows is not a featured article.

In any case, the icons have been moved from the logo section to the history or version section which is more appropriate. The entire removal of the previous version icons in the reasoning of the 'contemporary' one is fine does not seem very encyclopedic. Mkdw ^talk 10:29, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AFD rationales[edit]

Please give much better rationales at AFD than "non-notable X". Please follow the advice in User:Uncle G/On notability#Giving_rationales_at_AFD. Uncle G 19:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Blocking[edit]

Most kind! If there's no argument, I'll move it to my honors page. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 19:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Canyon live oak[edit]

This is of course the ultimate question one asks....what constitutes importance? Within project California there are over 10,000 articles and ultimately about 10 percent will be rated as High priority (about one or two percent will become top priority). Look at the other california articles rated high: Ahwahnee Hotel, Hoover Tower, Bishop Pine, etc. My own opinion is that canyon live oak easily merits the high designation as a tree of many uses and a tree that prehistorically had a dominant status in california, thus influencing evolution of many other species. this topic as all ratings are open to debate, but the "mid" category has some amazingly unimportant items like minor politicians, little known streams, etc. i stick by my assessment. let me know your thoughts. regards Anlace 23:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC).[reply]

IP Vandalism...[edit]

Looks like the vandalism is slow, so I guess it's not to big of a deal. ---J.S ^(T/C) 16:43, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Being an admin[edit]

Yes, you are allowed to say that. Anyway, keep up the good work and you may be an administrator yourself one day – Gurch 18:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sigma Chi[edit]

Yeah, I did get it from you. I was trying to figure out how to make them and ran across your profile via the sigma chi page. You should add it to the userbox list. In Hoc! Acidskater 21:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know of a way to get the Sigma Chi page closed so that only actual Sigs can edit it? If so lets do it. I spoke to Eric Bolt from HQ and he said it was a good idea. In Hoc! Acidskater 16:34, 6 December 2006 (EST)

No more speedy deletion? How about 'plain' deletion then?[edit]

I think that britishinsurance.com is definitely something that should be deleted: it is only three sentences long. I know that length (or shortness) is not a thing alone for deletion; but I honestly think that the text of this article should just be moved into the Virgin Birth page due to the fact that it is the only page that links to britishinsurance.com. After looking at the criterea again, I'll agree that it should not have been 'speedy deletion,' but I'm going to put a 'regular 'deletion tag on there now. Scoutersig 22:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great, that's what AfD is for as you know... now go get 'em dog. Reswobslc 23:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I find your accusion of spam very rude. As a Wikipedian of 4 years, I am hardly adding spam by this article. Astrotrain 00:10, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Attack on Pearl Harbor umpires[edit]

Yes, umpires. War games and military exercises have umpires. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 01:23, 9 December 2006 (UTC) They would take measurements and decide what would have happened had real bombs fallen instead of practice bombs or sacks of paint or flour. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 01:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isaac Asimov[edit]

Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 01:34, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you like my work on the Asimov short story collections. The Nightfall collection is nearly complete, but there are many more to be completed, such as Buy Jupiter. --Robert Fraser 02:30, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion about WikiProject:California assessments[edit]

Hi there. You might be interested in the discussion about WikiProject California assessments taking place at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California/Assessment#Importance scale. I noticed that you have discussed this in the past with User:Anlace. Mike Dillon 06:13, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Southern California WikiProject actually came first. There were, at that time, about a dozen regular editors of Southern California article, but they were all doing their own thing, except that about half of them did some editing and vandal reversions on the Los Angeles, California article. I created the project to try to get some of those editors to work together.

I created WP:CAL afterwards. I figured that it was eventually going to be created anyway, and WP:SOCAL needed a parent. I was tempted (just a little) to leave the project as an empty WikiProject template and let someone else have the 'fun' of filling it out, but that's the sort of thing I can't do. I filled WP:CAL in a way that I think that anyone interested in helping out with California articles can jump right it, and I've tried to keep a watch over the project and answer question on the project's talk page.

Still, I've spent most of my effort on WP:SOCAL, and so I think that project is better organized and better documented. Neither project, however, seems to be as active or self-sustaining as some of the WikiProjects are.

As far at the talk page WikiProject banners go, you should change all articles that are strictly about SoCal from {{WikiProject California}} to {{WikiProject Southern California}}. A few articles, such as major cities (e.g. Los Angeles, California) or major geological features (e.g. Death Valley), should get both templates. The same goes for articles on anything that exists in both, or are important to both Northern California and Southern California, such as California Aqueduct, which should get both templates. There are probably some articles that will have different ratings between the different project (perhaps Long Beach and San Diego should be rated High in SoCal, but Mid in CAL), but the California Aqueduct is important to both regions, so I'd rate it High for both WikiProjects. I don't think I'd rate it Top for SoCal like you did, but I also think that there are good arguments for rating it Top, so I won't quibble over that rating.

We need to find a Bot owner who can help us do the conversions of the from WP:CAL to WP:SOCAL for SoCal articles. I've already mapped out the logic that would be necessary to make it a fairly foolproof conversion, but I don't know any Bot owners. Mike Dillon is creating one, but I don't think that it is ready for primetime. ^Blank ^Verse 02:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How does one tell if the article concerns only SoCal, and not California as a whole? I think that Aquarium of the Pacific may count as one, as well as my home town of Moreno Valley, California; articles like San Luis Obispo County, California pretty much stradles the line of importance, and you pointed out that the city of LA is significant to both areas; but really, it's too vague for me to understand at the moment. Perhaps you could help narrow it down; maybe with several people inputting, we can make a wikiproject guideline, or even *gasp* a policy. —ScouterSig 07:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a judgement call, as with much of what is involved with doing the assessments. The scope listed at WP:WPSC#Scope is the best place to start.

As for the Aquarium of the Pacific, my personal opinion (even though it is a local topic for me) is that the Monterey Bay Aquarium was a pioneering public aquarium and is doing important research, but the AotP is mostly a nice local tourist attraction (although much more interesting the the RMS Queen Mary). ^Blank ^Verse 08:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why you added the Attention parameter to your assessment of History of Los Angeles, California. As it says, when you use that parameter: "This article has been marked as needing immediate attention." To me, that means that the article has SERIOUS problems, such as major POV writing, edit warring, formatting problems, etc.

I also answered your question at talk:History of Los Angeles, California. ^Blank ^Verse 09:09, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As for the LA article: "oops." I didn't realize that it was as such: I thought it was a much more discreet suggestion and less of a blatant attention alarm. I also appreciate your comment on the article's talk page. —ScouterSig 15:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See the discussion on my talk page at User talk:BlankVerse#WikiProject-specific categories for references, etc. Mike Dillon has what I think is a very interesting idea where he'd use a Bot to look at all the pages in a WikiProject, looking for any articles that have dispute templates, and then the Bot would create a page for the WikiProject of all their pages that need attention.

As for the sort of attention that you were thinking of, both projects have Todo pages (e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject Southern California/to do) that have been used successfully by other WikiProjects, but have been unused on the California WikiProjects. Someone even removed the transclusion of the SoCal Todo page from the main SoCal WP page because it wasn't being used. Other projects have used either WP-specific Collaborations or Article Improvement Drive pages to get groups of editors to work together on on an article. So far, the members of both California WikiProjects haven't shown much enthusiasm for group projects, so I haven't tried to force anything. If you want to try to start something, take a look at some of the WikiProjects that have successfully used those techniques, but be prepared to be a cheerleader for awhile until the efforts become more self-sustaining. ^Blank ^Verse 22:28, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities[edit]

A HA! I finally got you to follow my example and join the project. I was wondering when you were going to to join, you person addicted to wikipedia Samwisep86 22:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

SuggestBot originally gave me some suggestions on 17 December 2006 (UTC); YOU should go get some too! —ScouterSig 19:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Test Icicles[edit]

Hey, no problem. The fact that the guy's name was (inexplicably) a redirect to Test icicles instead of just being the article itself and making Test icicles a redirect made no sense. But all is well now! -- Kicking222 20:48, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IP Revert[edit]

That's strange, when I reverted it, it was his vandalism of your first warning. Your warning wasn't showing up anymore and I thought I was reverting it back to your warning, which is what showed after I made the revert. I wasn't trying to revert you at all, but trying to recall your warning from his vandalism. Shsilver 21:24, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Userbox[edit]

I appreciate the validation of my point of view in your new userbox. Mufka 16:11, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pizza![edit]

Kewl! My first wiki award! :) Thanks a lot. --Eliyahu S ^Talk 22:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the award[edit]

Thank you for the barnstar. I didn't think anyone noticed the redirects. ;-)

Heck even I don't really pay much attention to them, except when I run across a weird one, or someone has created one or more in violation of WP:POINT (looking at "What links here" on even semi-controversial articles can sometimes be enlightening).

If just 1% of my edits have been redirects, I've done at least 130 of them. I thought that guestimate might be high, but if I've averaged four redirects a month for almost two years, that's 96 redirects. If you count both new redirects and the editing of old redirects, I think that I've probably done that many.

Just my personal opinion: The best subject line is just a simple direct "Thank you".

Would you mind if I kept your praise on my talk page, but edited out the barnstar? ^Blank ^Verse 21:09, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was quick! Thank you for taking care of my last request. ^Blank ^Verse 21:19, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. Perhaps I'm bummed that you don't "do" barnstars, but I'm not here to judge: just to give praise where necessary. Happy wiki-ing! —ScouterSig 21:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The main problem that I have with barnstars is that I've seen a few too many instances of editing cliques who have circle jerked each other with barnstars, essentially rewarding each other for their POV edit warring. I greatly appreciate any of the personal thank you's that I've received over the past couple of years (including yours), but I am not fond of barnstars and so I have preferred to keep my user pages barnstar-free. ^Blank ^Verse 23:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Vincent van Gogh[edit]

The heading has now been linked. Good idea! Dafoeberezin3494 17:28, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, here you go![edit]

File:CFJ3.jpg

I saw your userpage, and I found out you're an Eagle Scout! Well, as thanks for signing my autograph book, I hereby award you this Eagle Scout Medal (did I say that right? :-). --Tohru Honda13^{Sign here!} 07:37, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

		The Society Barnstar
		For your work in improving all articles related to Greek Life, even though Sigma Chi is the best. Acidskater 10:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		With thanks I award you this Barnstar. Timrollpickering 18:33, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]