User talk:Scoutersig/Archive 2008

Your request[edit]

See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Scouting#Category_help and the cat talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:45, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sigma Chi[edit]

I dont know if this worked, but you asked me if I was a member of Sigma Chi. I am an Alumni, Class of '04, Theta Chapter, Former Consul, Life Loyal Sig. I have attended Balfour Leadership Training Workshop, as well as numerous area initiations. I currently help out with the Philadelphia Area Alumni Chapter as well. I assume that you wrote the page on Sigma Chi or at least part of it, I was just correcting that one little point, hope you don't mind!

Hope you get this, if so feel free to reply on my page as I will forget how I got to your page in the first place!

Maps[edit]

what kind of maps would you like for the Quad Cities page? Ctjf83 ^talk 19:56, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, something like a map with the political borders of all four cities (maybe five cities) within the state(s). —Scouter Sig 19:57, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could I use like a google or yahoo map? Ctjf83 ^talk 03:00, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately not, since they are copyrighted. Ask around on the Geography portal or the Atlas portal. —Scouter Sig 06:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:163227347 3bf47879c2.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:163227347 3bf47879c2.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 (talk) 18:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TMNT[edit]

Haha, thanks! The Turtles were a big part of my childhood, so... here I am! Anyway, to answer your question, yes I removed the 1987 character list from the template because it is redundant, since we already have a list of characters, and individual pages for all the major characters. I've already proposed that the 1987 list be merged into the complete list. Once that's done we can redirect the 1987 list to the complete list (or we can delete it, since only one other page links to it). I just didn't want to do it right away in case there is information in the 1987 list that's not in the complete list; I wanted to give someone else the time to go over it and merge the information, since I don't have time to do it myself. -- Ritchy (talk) 02:31, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Dude[edit]

An editor has nominated Dude, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dude and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 01:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Boy Scout Handbook[edit]

I'm curious where you got Image:Handbook.jpg. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 17:25, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I scanned my copy at my house. ...I forgot to put that, didn't I? —Scouter Sig 18:46, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is intriguing :-) I did the Hazardous Weather training [1] last week. When it gets to the hypothermia section, guess what handbook image is used? That ripple in the cover is a dead giveaway. I can send you a screen shot if you want. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 19:14, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's amazing. We (Wikipedia) are becoming a source for everything. You'd think that the official Scouting webpage would be able to have thier own scan, haha. —Scouter Sig 19:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Like these rather pristine covers: [2] Mine are much more "experienced". --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 19:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here you go: [3] --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 19:33, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Future now past.[edit]

Things like 1984, published in 1948 it was the future. 1984 is now the past. It's a bad title I guess. Duggy 1138 (talk) 10:08, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, now that I know what it means, I think it's a beautiful title. Unfortunately, I'm not sure what to make of it on Wikipedia. —Scouter Sig 16:39, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Foundation Planets[edit]

Hey, I noticed from a couple foundation planet articles I have watchlisted that you've been doing some work in both the template list and the list of planets. A couple months age I left a proposal on the talk page of List of Foundation planets, about merging all the foundation planet articles into the list of planets, summarizing the important information, since most articles have little content or repeat themselves. Maybe the most important articles could be kept, but less important ones could be added to the list. I also think it a good idea to incorporate the minor planets to the list. What do you think about this? Thanks, --Slartibartfast1992 22:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is also the List of minor Foundation-universe planets page. I think I've got (have gotten?) all of the planets separated into their appropriate pages, meaning either major or minor. None of the articles/lists/sections will ever look like this or this because there just wasn't as much written about the created universe. I've also got a private list of all the Foundation-related articles here in my userspace, if you want to take a look. And what I said about the planet lists goes the same for some of the other "concepts" articles, too. —Scouter Sig 23:14, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So you don't think that merging all foundation articles into one single list would be a good idea? --Slartibartfast1992 01:35, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't think that's necessary at this point. Perhaps a few more merges here or there as we go, but I think that they are good at the moment. —Scouter Sig 02:23, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Just tossing ideas around. --Slartibartfast1992 22:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You![edit]

Hi, Scoutersig.
Thank you very much for the beautiful California Star.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:48, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

Yes, Wikipedia does have those categories. Kuralyov (talk) 12:13, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asimov Cats[edit]

Nope!, Novels are a literary form, normally published in book or codex form, often as serialised novels in newspapers or magazines etc. Nowadays of course they are being published online without ever seeing the printed page let alone a book. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 15:58, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you might have the idea. Although Asimov's might have all been published so, many authors weren't. So the question is how to set up a standard structure that works across the board. For individual novels the categorization can be more free but in a broad scheme like Works by author and its sub-categories we need to be clear and simple. Novels, short stories, novellas, poems, plays, screenplays, fables, etc. all are literary forms and should not be confused with means of delivery, often thought of as media. Thanks :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 16:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deal. I do believe I understand now, haha. Thanks for taking time to explain it to me. —Scouter Sig 16:42, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Asimov template[edit]

Sure, it looks good. Nice job! Cerebellum (talk) 20:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes is does look nice - only change I would make would be to change "Books" to "Writings". I know they are all books in your current list but it would allow for the addition of "Short stories" at a later date. Otherwise, straight forward and attractive. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 16:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eagle Scout[edit]

Noticed you are an Eagle Scout. I got mine a little more than a year ago; it's always nice to meet others! Churchymcgee (talk) 06:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User categories relating to media and genres[edit]

Scoutersig...You are invited to discuss a guideline for the naming and organization of user categories that involve media and genres. - LA @ 10:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on Asimov's Robot series[edit]

I was refering to the discussion page, but I hadn't finished writing it yet. It's ready now though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by O0pyromancer0o (talk • contribs) 16:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Looks good and I agree. —Scouter Sig 16:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Future Relient K albums[edit]

Thanks for heads up - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Future Relient K albums. - JulesN Talk 09:04, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Hi. I appreciated your edit in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) article moving the Disambiguation paragraph. You raise a very important point. I put a comment about the disambiguation paragraph in the Talk:Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) section there. I would appreciate your observations and further suggestions. John Park (talk) 13:35, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I've been a Disciple all my life; if you'd like some help on said article, let me know. —Scouter Sig 17:43, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fabulous! I can use all the help I can get. The article has stabilized a bit since I began editing and providing citations. Recently, most of the edits have corrected my typos. Now it is about the Disciples. Before, it seemed to be more about why we were wrong not to be Churches of Christ or independent Christian Churches. The article is weakest right now in the Regional & General Church segments. (Needing better and more concise content, citations, etc.) I am open to suggestions, edits, evaluations of strengths and weakensses. Or just occasional conversations on the talk page. I hope you have added it to your watch list. No one "owns" an article in wikipedia, but I have an investment in this one, and have enjoyed the give and take with other editors. My problem right now is that I am rapidly becoming blind to my own POV as it creeps in. John Park (talk) 18:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for "signing" the book.[edit]

The Master thanks you and wishes you blue skies and sunny days. Master Redyva (talk) 18:44, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:The Judds[edit]

I have nominated Category:The Judds (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 17:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of The Tobasco Donkeys[edit]

I have nominated The Tobasco Donkeys, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Tobasco Donkeys. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 17:36, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some references would help. --evrik ^(talk) 17:14, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:TobascoDonkeys.jpg)[edit]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 01:01, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you![edit]

I appreciate the barnstar award for tagging all those Ohio bios with the person's county of origin. I have had some extra time, and the project has been something I had been planning for some time. It's nice to be on the home stretch now. Again, thank you for recognizing my efforts. 8th Ohio Volunteers (talk) 20:03, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]