User talk:Stevertigo/Archive 13

Bolivarian Circles?[edit]

Hi Stevertigo, my name's Dan, and I'm an adult education ESL teacher and a grad student at San Francisco State University. I'm writing a paper on Bolivarian Circles, and I'm curious to know how you found out about them, and what resources there are in English about them. -Danspalding 07:06, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your 8th archive[edit]

Stevertigo, it looks like someone moved your 8th archive to a nasty name, after which it got speedy deleted. I'm going to fix that now, if you don't mind. Jayjg ^(talk) 16:37, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it looks like it happened almost exactly a year ago. All fixed now. Jayjg ^(talk) 16:40, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Article renaming[edit]

Steve, why did you move the article about the extra-judicial prisoners being held by the CIA? Everyone realizes the name (as it was) is horrible: I first heard of this article when I voted on Afd (I said delete, mostly because of the name.) There is, at the top of the talk page, a discussion with a numbered list of article names. Discussion is mostly in the ruling out phase. You didn't even pick a name off the list, and there were nine to choose from! Why oh why did you ignore consensus and do such a hasty thing? There are already names in discussion and you randomly make another one up and instead of adding it to the list as suggestion 10 you ignore everyone else and just move it? Why? KillerChihuahua 21:24, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Assad[edit]

The reason why I created the article as Muhammad Assad (terror suspect) instead of as plain old Muhammad Assad was that when I was writing the first draft, and I did a google search on his name, I got a lot of false positives. It must be a popular name. I didn't think that this fellow should get the primary name, without modifiers just because he was first to get an article.

If you consider the "(terror suspect)" suffix to be POV perhaps you could explain why. Saying a guy is a terror suspect is not the same as saying he is a terrorist. Do you have an alternate appelation you consider NPOV?

I'll agree, in general, that some names chosen in the War on Terror, suck. Insurgent is one that bugs me. It bugged me even more, when the CPA was in charge, as it implied that Bremer's administration was legitimate, even though it had no popular mandate, and couldn't supply law and order, or basic services. But I don't understand why you object to detainee. -- Geo Swan 01:04, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFAR/TDC[edit]

I fully support your RFAR against TDC[, and have taken the liberty of reformatting your comments there to be more appropriate and readable, as well as adding a comment of my own. Regards, -St|eve 01:32, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help! Your help with the RFAR[1] was unexpected, since I was only asking about the deletes.[2] I uncovered the two requests for comment today[3] [4], I guess this is before you had the privelege of meeting TDC, because your comments are missing.

I look forward to your opinion on the deletions. Depite their incredibly high number, it appears the deletions are okay.[5]Travb 02:04, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Response continues once again on my talk page Travb 02:30, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Biblespeak and Metaphorical language[edit]

Is there any more to these pages than Original Research? I'm glad that a page on biblespeak (I've heard it called "Christianese") exists, but it really doesn't capture what I consider to be the essence of the practice (one with which I am very familiar). The page on Metaphorical language acts like it's describing a legitimate linguistic concept, but it's one which I can't find references to anywhere else (I am not a linguist). Staecker 19:38, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! There's a page called Christianese! I hope you won't mind if I make Biblespeak a redirect.

I still think something should be done about Metaphorical language. Maybe a delete? It's essentially orphaned without Biblespeak. Staecker 19:40, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mia Farrow[edit]

If you're interested, the information on the Mia Farrow/Woody Allen dispute could be enhanced on the Woody Allen page. -155.91.28.231 21:17, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

When you get back[edit]

There is an article which could very much use your attention - it needs an experienced editor who is efficient and can be ruthless, and I lack the time and fortitude. It is currently Media and ethnicity, IMHO it would be more accurate to move it to Ethnic stereotypes in American media. Inherently strongly biased throughout, largely unwikified, bad style, overlength, highly POV, a good deal of original research... its a mess. I saw the pleas on the talk page for experienced editors to help, and thought of you, because you seem to have the attributes which are needed in ample amounts. KillerChihuahua 04:34, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration[edit]

Hey, I see that your arbcom case is being closed with the decision to de-admin you. While I currently agree with the remedy, as I said on the RFA, I'd like to be able to support you eventually, and I feel that you will be admin material again. So, let me know next time you're on RFA, please. :) --Phroziac^(talk) 03:36, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from TDC[edit]

Just a heads up:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Travb/Archive_1#I_suppose_its_time_to_directly_engage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TDC#My_talk_page

Merge from State sponsored terrorism[edit]

Please see talk:State terrorism#Merge from State sponsored terrorism Philip Baird Shearer 09:23, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Final decision[edit]

The arbitration committee has reached a final decision in the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Stevertigo case. Raul654 19:41, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration accepted[edit]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Winter Soldier has been accepted. Please place evidence at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Winter Soldier/Evidence. You may make proposals and comments at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Winter Soldier/Workshop. Fred Bauder 20:48, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Case assigned for MentCom[edit]

You've been assigned. Now show up in #wikipedia-probation. R e dwolf24 (talk) Attention Washingtonians! 01:17, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Need your comments[edit]

As you know, currently there is arbitration, request for evidence pending on User:TDC. [6]

I welcome and encourage your comments on the arbitration page.Travb 23:08, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Talk pages[edit]

I've removed a couple of formatting guidelines that you seem to have added: "Don't indent text" and "Use moderate to large blocks of text (i.e. not single sentence paragraphs)." Just a heads-up. Melchoir 19:56, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied. Melchoir 20:21, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for Audio converter[edit]

Hello, good work on Audio converter, and thanks for the contribution. However, you did not provide any references or sources in the article. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a push to encourage editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. From what websites, books, or other places did you learn the information that you added to Audio converter? Would it be possible for you to mention them in the article? You can simply add links, or see WP:CITET if you wish to review some of the different citation methods. Thanks! Lupin|talk|popups 12:41, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Citations? That's all just basic stuff that anybody who's dealt in recording knows. Thanks for the kudos though. I should make a graph too illustrate the wave curve. -St|eve 20:07, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi, while I apprecite that it may be general knowledge to specialists, part of the point of citing sources is to make it possible to check sneaky vandals inserting false information. It would be helpful if you could dig something up so that someone can verify this stuff. If not, don't lose sleep over it though! Cheers, Lupin|talk|popups 20:09, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Matrices[edit]

Hi. "Matrix" is a disambig page - should this template point to a more specific topic, or is the disambig link intentional? Cheers! BD2412 T 20:50, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've redirected the link to Matrix (mathematics) for now, since that's the binge you were in. :-D BD2412 T 23:08, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ethno-stub[edit]

I see that on June 9th of this year, you've edited {{ethno-stub}} [7]. To be more precise, you changed the category from Category:Ethnicity stubs to Category:Ethnic group stubs. Could you explain this edit at the SFD? Aecis ^praatpaal 10:01, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

World Citizen userbox, {{User world}}[edit]

Hi, I noticed the message saying you're a World Citizen, I would like to invite you to add {{User world}} to your user page if you wish to proclaim it in a more effective way, and this template will also add you automatically to the Wikipedians with World Citizenship category. :) --Mistress Selina Kyle 00:08, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Go[edit]

Hi, I noticed to you that I copyied the image of Ko you had posted on this wiki. Now this is on the commons. fr:User:jonathaneo

RFA questions[edit]

Steve, if you decide to keep your RFA going, I would strongly recommend that you answer the questions at the bottom. A number of users are voting neutral or oppose because of your lack of response. You may also wish to consider withdrawing your nomination at this time, as you would need around 75 more supporters with no more opposition (assuming no one changes his vote) to be successful. — Knowledge Seeker দ 18:34, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Shortcuts[edit]

Hey, thanks for the awesome sorting job. I'm working on it more, but you got a big ball rolling. Thanks and good work! Blackcap (talk) 21:09, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Latest User:Lightbringer sockpuppet[edit]

See User:KJVTRUTH's contribution history. You labeled his other socks on his talk page, so I thought I'd alert you directly. DreamGuy 22:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Rollcall[edit]

Hello, I'm just checking to make sure you're active. I'm checking with all the mediators listed as active to make sure they are truly active and ready to take a case. Reply at my talk page ASAP :) Redwolf24 (talk) 04:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet of User:Lightbringer[edit]

Hello. You have had dealings with User:Lightbringer and his socks previously, so I figured you might be the right person to tell - seems he is back, with a new sock: User:24.68.242.147. I took the liberty to label him as a sock, and to place two warning messages on his talkpage (I got a feeling there will be more soon...) - if I've overstepped what a regular editor is allowed I just have appologise. WegianWarrior 11:34, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

missing Wikipedia:Manual of Style (abbreviations)[edit]

Somehow, and I'm sure it was an accident, the entire article that you reference as {{main}} is blank? (I'll watch here for your answer.)

--William Allen Simpson 19:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Untagged images[edit]

Hi, I am cleaning up some untagged images. See Wikipedia:Untagged images. Could you tag these two pictures you uploaded, Image:TieredDR.png and Image:TieredDR.svg, with the appriate tag? Tnx. Garion96 ^(talk) 19:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please Take This Case[edit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation&action=purge#phpBB_entry_dispute

Could you please take a look at Talk:phpBB and comment regarding the link to phpBBhacks.com? (There is a new discussion section towards the bottom started by Pti. —Locke Cole • t • c 23:17, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Nolan-based political spectrum.png[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Nolan-based political spectrum.png. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Longhair 16:20, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Names for the Eucharist[edit]

Hi. I saw your edit to the intro of Eucharist. Be aware that there is already a section of the article dealing with all the names of this rite. I don't have a problem with your edit, but someone else might. If you get reverted, you might want to read the talk page before trying again. The issue of names for this rite has been controversial in the past. --Srleffler 03:14, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rule[edit]

I noticed your edit to Rule. You might want to take a look at the Manual of Style. The disambiguating links should not be bold, and typically nothing else should be linked, besides the words being disambiguated. A previous editor had applied this standard, and you reverted him. (His edit was probably too sparse, but had the right style.)--Srleffler 05:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Kuniyoshi1.jpeg[edit]

Hi - I was going through some old images and came across this one. It doesn't have a license or a very clear source, so could you either add that info or delete the image? Thanks! -SCEhard T 01:45, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Bolivia Gas 1.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Bolivia Gas 1.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

-SCEhard T 06:30, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Philosophy[edit]

I've replaced the {{cleanup}} template, for the reasons given originally. I agree that it's a pity that the article needs it, but it does. It seems to have been taken over by a small number of PoV-pushers whose understanding of the subject is minimal, but whose determination to have their own way is deep. I just don't have the time or the energy for that kind of fight at the moment, but when I do, I'll try to do some of the required work myself, and recruit other knowledgeable Wikipedians to join in. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:27, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Goko1.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Goko1.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Nv8200p talk 00:12, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look on Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion to find reason for deletion -Nv8200p talk 18:57, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The reason is listed right after the name. The letters OR mean that the image is an orphan (not attached to any articles). There is a list of of these abbreviations at the top of the page for future reference -Nv8200p talk 19:05, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation at phpBB[edit]

Do you plan on mediating the problems at the phpBB article? It is seriously in need of it. Things are "out of hand". 131.30.121.23 19:58, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:UK Common[edit]

I believe this template was used as part of a dispute resolution. However it now appears to me to not be used at all except in the talk archive and the Main concept is a red link. Since you are the only contributer would you consider deleting it? --Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 22:52, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Terrorism (disambiguation)[edit]

You created a page called Terrorism (disambiguation). Many users have since contributed to it. The page now delineates six distinct meanings of the word and links to thirty-three terrorism related articles (when the page isn't blanked by User:JW1805). The discussion page lists the five distinct meanings that the Oxford English Dictionary gives for terrorism. JW1805 regularly blanks the Terrorism (disambiguation) page and any discussion that doesn't serve his personal POV. Now he wants to delete the entire article, pretend that the world uses only one definition of "terrorism," and wipe all information to the contrary from Wikipedia.

I think that the world has more than one distinct definition of terrorism. For instance, I'm sure you've heard people refer to President Bush as a terrorist because they believe that he tries to awaken or spread a feeling of terror or alarm. These people are using the term in a dyslogistic sense[8]. There is no overlap between the dyslogistic definition and one involving violent ex-patriots. I think that these are two examples of completely different meanings for the same word. What do you think? --Hypnodude 15:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi; I have blocked Hypnodude (talk · contribs) as a sockpuppet of banned user Zephram Stark (talk · contribs). Tom Harrison ^Talk 16:15, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- It's about good and god damn time someone banned these assholes. Fuckin terrorist sympathizers want to have some "literal" meaning of terrorism, like anyone in this great nation can talk about terrorism without remembering how we were attacked for no reason except that they hate freedom. Terrorism will always mean evil violence against innocent civilians. It is now illegal to say anything that helps terrorists, and that is exactly what these assholes are doing by saying that other people were terrified and threatened by the U.S. of A. Those civilians weren't innocent and our violence against them wasn't evil. Anyone who loves this country better stand behind what the president says is terrorism and if you don't, get the fuck out! --Tipps (the Man) 17:35, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NIH pregnancy images[edit]

Image:Pregnancy.gif is currently being considered for Feature Picture status. As the image is based on Image:Month_1_sm.jpg to Image:Month_9_sm.jpg, which you originally uploaded with a {{PD-USGov-NIH}} tag, I'd like to ask you if you could point me to the original source of the images. I was unable to locate these images on the NIH web site via Google, and since the image description pages contain no source information, I have not been able to provide confirmation that these images were in fact created by a NIH employee (see comments on the nomination page). Thanks in advance, and thanks for uploading the images in the first place. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 12:08, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also had a question about these images. I haven't been able to find them, but they look very similar to the A.D.A.M. medical illustrations (www.adam.com) which the NIH have bought for their websites and are not in the public domain. It would be helpful if you could clarify the issue one way or the other.--nixie 02:48, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Brane-wlwswv.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Brane-wlwswv.png. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to indicate why we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, please read fair use, and then 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 want the image to be deleted, tag it as {{db-unksource}}.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo. 04:20, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Utckey.png[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Utckey.png. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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.

Holy cow![edit]

I can't believe I'm actually talking with the guy who invented the Wikipede! You are like a legend! I heard you're a hundred feet tall! Well not really, I just said that to make you sound like some sort of mythical heroic figure. Seriously though, you have made some great contributions to Wikipedia.

My verdict? Wikipede rules, Wiki-ant or whatever that thing's name is drools. Go Wikipede! NIRVANA2764 03:39, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello[edit]

Hello, I get to know that you are one of the Wikimedia Embassy in chinese wikipedia. I am not sure that if you are stilling responsible for communication with chinese wikipedians. Please leave message at:Yongxinge --Yongxinge 07:51, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

page move[edit]

What's with the moving of your user page? - UtherSRG (talk) 11:42, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:DavidDeutsch.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:DavidDeutsch.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. Thank you. Abu Badali 14:04, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:See also[edit]

Template:See also has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 08:56, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Miwiki.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Miwiki.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 14:57, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation[edit]

Hi Steve, could you please mediate a disagreement that has been going on concerning some wording on the Metrication article? Thanks, arfon 10:01, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Kaiser Permanente[edit]

Can you fill me in on what's going on with this case? I see only one of the parties signing on to the mediation, but also have a note that it was all but ready to go. I don't see much on the RfM page to suggest one way or the other. Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 01:54, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the issues for review were submitted by User:Pansophia who seems to be more interested in the article than other signees who may have drifted on to other things. I've added myself to the request although I'm neutral on many of the issues or think they have settled down. In my mind, the main two issues that could use mediator or peer review intervention are

when it is appropriate to include criticism in the article and where it belongs (see my comment on the talk page [9]) and
whether the citations are NPOV. Antonrojo 16:55, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, anyone there? (Image deletion warning)[edit]

You haven't made any response to my query about the NIH pregnancy images (Month_1_sm.jpg to Month_9_sm.jpg, plus the derivative Pregnancy.gif) above. Those images currently lack essential source information, which means their copyright status cannot be verified. By Wikipedia and Commons policy they should've been speedily deleted weeks ago. I've put up a request on the image description pages asking that they not be deleted until I get some response from either you or the NIH themselves, but so far I've heard from neither. I can't in good conscience leave that notice there forever. As you have no e-mail address configured for your account, this appears to be the only way I can contact you. I can see you're actively editing, so please make some response to this. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 09:28, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didnt note any tag - appreciate the note. I uploaded them assuming they were NIH licensed, before I noticed that NIH images may be proprietary. IIRC, I uploaded these to the commons so any local versions should be deleted, and any copyright issues dealt with at commons. Someone also edited a couple images to reformat them. Definitely something to look at. -Ste|vertigo 18:54, 3 April 2006 (UTC) (Copied from User talk:Ilmari Karonen#NIH Pregnancy.)[reply]

Thanks, but where did you find them? I've tried to Google for the file names, but all I find are Wikipedia mirrors. If I knew what page they were originally on, I might have more luck finding someone who knows who made them. There shouldn't be any local versions, but the Commons policy on image sourcing is essentially the same as the local one. The images are pretty widely used, so I'd hate to see them go if there's any chance they're in fact PD. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 19:13, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Feeding the multitude[edit]

Take a look here. If readers of the miracle page can't cope with the hatnote (or feel obliged to remove it rather than fix a poorly formatted one), then we'll have to go for a disambiguation page - a shame, as the miracle is by far the default use. I think the problem has been unwittingly exacerbated by the redirecting of "Feeding of the 5000" to Feeding the multitude. If you're a contributor here (I'm just a passing editor with no real life interest in either page), would you like to look at all these pages and co-ordinate some mutually acceptable arrangement? JackyR 12:35, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Number theory[edit]

You put a cleanup tag on number theory. It is difficult to know how to improve this article without knowing what your specific concerns are. I looked on the article's talk page and on Wikipedia:Cleanup, but couldn't find anything from you. Can you explain what exactly you think is wrong with this article ? Gandalf61 09:24, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To answer your question - yes, most areas of number theory study the properties of integers. Algebraic number theory extends the concept of integer to other algebraic fields - see, for example, Gaussian integer and Eisenstein integer. It would be more logical to call the discipline integer theory, but the misnomer is historical, and has become standard usage.

Would you mind if I copied your comments to Talk:Number theory so that anyone looking there can see the rationale behind the cleanup tag ? Gandalf61 14:58, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or what?[edit]

Hi Steve. Or what, an article you created, is being AFDed - could you help out with the discussion? Thanks --Dangherous 12:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It can go if it needs to. -Ste|vertigo 14:32, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Command Prompt article merge[edit]

Hi Stevertigo,

I have noticed that you put two merge tags on the Command Prompt article. Please note that merge proposals require tagging *both* the origin and the destination page (see Wikipedia:Merging and moving pages). I also guess you have to choose only one between Computer terminal and CLI, though you may mention alternatives on the relevant talk page.

PS: I prefer having the whole "thread" of discussion in one place, so don't be afraid to reply here :)

Cheers. --Gennaro Prota 12:48, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

please use the edit summary box[edit]

like in your recent edit to Oh-My-God particle. thank you. --Procrastinating@^talk2me 18:20, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:The sun-3.jpg[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:The sun-3.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. 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 qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then 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 media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. the iBook of the Revolution 09:00, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:The sun-2.jpg[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:The sun-2.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CreationWiki[edit]

As a contributor to the page CreationWiki, I feel it fair to warn you that it has been nominated for deletion. Please make your opinion known. PrometheusX303 20:48, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Empires[edit]

"Abyssinian Empire" isn't very accurate (neither is its beginnings in the 20th century). Each empire of Ethiopia is usually called a kingdom but a feudal one with an emperor - king of kings - at its head, and they at times incorporating foreign territories. Each one seems to have been a successor of the other beginning with D'mt (dates tentative, perhaps beginning 8th or 10th c. BC) being succeeded by Aksum (until 9th-10th c. AD - at "kingdom of aksum" but definitely an empire as it at times ruled Meroe and the various kingdoms of Yemen (e.g. the Sabaean kingdom; Himyar, Raydan, Sahlen, etc.), which was succeeded by the Zagwe Dynasty (dates tentative again - probably 10th c. AD-1270) , which was succeeded by the Solomonic dynasty (technically 1270-1974, but with the "Zemena Mesafint" or "Age of Princes" when Ethiopia was ruled by the Regent of the emperor and local kings had more power lasting from ~1755-1855) up to the present day. If you want to exclude D'mt for lack of information, Aksum is thought to have begun either the 1st c. BC or AD. I don't know what the empire over the ages should be called, but "ethiopian empire" (20k+ google hits) is much more often used than "abyssinian empire" (640 google hits).

Yom 05:27, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. The template being used was Template:Empire not Template:Empires. It was based directly off of yours (no change), so I've gone and edited that. I was wondering why all the formatting wasn't visible in Template:Empires!

Yom 19:25, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Meta e-mail[edit]

Hi! I'm leaving a message for all the meta admins who (like me until last week) have not updated/verified an e-mail address. If you have an opportunity, could you please update your preferences there? - Amgine 00:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:HurricaneWarning[edit]

Template:HurricaneWarning has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. (You made only one minor edit, but, inasmuch as you were one of only three registered users to have made any edits, I thought I ought to let you know...) Joe 03:37, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PMMA[edit]

When you move a major page such as polymethyl methacrylate to a new title, please fix all the redirects to point to the new page. Thanks, AxelBoldt 17:07, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Romanji flagged for deletion[edit]

There's no such word, so I've flagged Romanji for deletion. You were probably thinking of Romaji (or perhaps Jumanji?). Just thought I'd let you know, since this seems to be one of your articles. Sakurambo 12:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

parallelogram law[edit]

Your edit could make it appear that this article is only about elementary geometry, and "only" seems to strong even if it is not explicit. Michael Hardy 20:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Einstongue.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Einstongue.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Arniep 21:29, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Uday hussein.jpg[edit]

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Uday hussein.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.

Fred-Chess 11:27, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation Committee Business[edit]

Dear Fellow Mediators:

I'm writing to all mediators listed as active to point out several emergent issues that require the immediate attention of all active mediators. The Committee has come to a place where we can neither provide the function we were created to provide (timely formal mediaton for the English Wikipedia community) nor correct matters to be able to provide that function. In specific, we cannot perform any mediations, because most mediators are no longer taking cases, and we cannot add new mediators, because mediators are no longer responding to requests to join the Committee. I am in a place where I continually accept new cases for the committee, only to see them go stale after several months because there is no mediator willing to take it, and where I deny candidates a place on the committee because no mediator will speak up in support of them. I ask that all mediators take ten minutes to look over the following matters:

There are five requests to join the Mediation Committee, three with no comments whatsoever, and two that have been up for more than a month without sufficient commentary to determine a consensus on promotion.

There are four unassigned mediation cases, and will likely be at least two additional ones within the week.

I beg, beseech, and pray each Mediator to please take a few moments to at the very least comment on the five candidates, and to consider taking one of the open cases. We are at a place where we are literally relying on the kindness of strangers: Almost all cases are being taken by non-Commitee volunteers at this point. Putting the open tasks page (which only changes when we add a new case), and the main committee page on your watchlist so you will know when new nominations and cases are added, would go a long way to helping the Committee succeed. (If having the main page pop up on your watchlist every time someone else comments in a nomination is too annoying, I can move them to subpages like RFA, so that the page will only change when a new nomination is added.)

Additionally, I ask that all mediators check that they have a current email address subscribed to the Mediation Committee mailing list, mediation-l, to avoid the need for future talk page messages of this sort.

My apologies for having to air the committee's dirty laundry in this manner, but I fear it is the only way to get everyone together to bring the Committee back to life. For the convenience of those who simply cannot be involved due to time constraints, I will be listing those that do not participate in any Committee activities as mediators emeriti, so that we have a clearer picture of who exactly we have available to take cases. I am, by separate posting, asking all mediators emeriti to return to actively participating in the requests to join the commmittee.

Yours respectfully, Essjay (Talk • Connect) 02:26, 19 May 2006 (UTC) |}[reply]

Template:Shortchronology[edit]

Hi Stevertigo,

Just out of curiosity, what is the purpose of Template:Shortchronology? It only has links from your page and the red links lists. It looks like a "sandbox" item to me. Regards, Rfrisbie^talk 04:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image info on commons[edit]

Any chance you could add the requested info to commons:Image:Stopwatch.jpg so we can continue to use it at Simple English Wikipedia? 24.18.215.132 01:36, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

help?[edit]

Hey Steve, can you comment here? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cultural_and_historical_background_of_Jesus#recent_changes I am concerned that User:CrazyInSane and User:Codex Sinaiticus will not give up easily - and will not allow for any compromise whatsoever. Slrubenstein | Talk 14:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Love-zh.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Love-zh.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Silk Road[edit]

SVG of PNG uploaded as Image:Transasia_trade_routes_1stC_CE_nbg.svg. TwoOneTwo 21:37, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Doomsday event[edit]

Hello Stevertigo -- I replied to your message re Doomsday event on my talk page, User_talk:WikiPedant. -- WikiPedant 04:19, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

Hi Steve,

I noticed your subpage Turkish atrocities against Kurds. Would you be able to help contribute to the Casualties of the Turkish-Kurdish conflict page? It was originally title PKK victims, but was renamed in an AfD. As it stands, almost all of the things on the timeline are about Turks who were killed by Kurds, but we need information about casualties from the other side as well! Thanks. —Khoikhoi 18:32, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm...hello? —Khoikhoi 06:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, there isn't a dispute in the article, I'd just like it to be more neutral. Thanks anyways. —Khoikhoi 06:51, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Circaflier.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Circaflier.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

heads-up[edit]

Moo. I've partially rv'd your mods to the lede sentence over at Zoroastrianism. Ironically enough, your assertions were precisely the ones that need to be avoided,... I've listed the "bugs" that are frequently added (never seen a non-anon do them though) on talk, including reasons why they are problematic. If your additions were misled by some text in the article itself, please note that on talk so that someone familiar with the subject can fix them. Thanks. -- Fullstop 12:43, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AFD[edit]

As an AIW member please review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of relationships with age disparity and please take a side.

Legal status[edit]

Hi Stevertigo. I've removed the law-related {{legal status}} template from the social status article, as the subject does not relate to law. Hope you don't mind - please make contact on a relevant talk-page if you would like to discuss this further. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 09:59, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient Near East warfare taskforce[edit]

I see you’re a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near East. Might you be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Ancient Near East warfare task force? See its talk page at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Ancient Near East taskforce? Neddyseagoon 15:37, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Circaflier2.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Circaflier2.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 17:05, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trust in Wikipedia[edit]

this is Cathy from Hong Kong working on a research about trust on Wikipedia. I wonder if you would kindly contact me at researchingmedia@gmail.com? I'd like to chat with you about Wikipedia of your language. Would you kindly drop me your email or IM (Skype, MSN, AIM or ICQ)? It wouldn't take more than ten minutes, but it would help enormously for us to understand the overall trust-based social landscape of Wikipedia. Thank you! --Mapocathy 07:59, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

theoria[edit]

Hey I really appreciate your contributions to theoria excellent article. LoveMonkey 15:11, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done-sky LoveMonkey 18:32, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments on the Anti-Semitic people category[edit]

Dear fellow editor: I appreciated your comments about this category,[10] and it now appears that the matter is inconclusive, but there are those who want to remove the warning sign that it is disputed on whether or not to put people in this category. It is a perennial problem, and your continued supervision of the situation would be greatly appreciated by me and other editors who have a problem with this prejudicial category.--Drboisclair 15:11, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response, Stevertigo[edit]

Thank you for responding to my message. I would appreciate it, if you so desire to e-mail me through Wiki-e-mail. The ad absurdum tactic is effective in any consistent ideological system. I would imagine that you are composing a manifesto re: the category.--Drboisclair 02:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your additions to the theology article[edit]

I still think the material you have re-posted on the theology article needs to be deleted, or at very least moved. Here's why:

'Typically Greek and Latin language-derived terms': only if you are concentrating on a narrow range of Western theologies, which at least the early parts of the article try not to do. There are forms of theology historically and today which focus on Syriac, Hebrew, Arabic, Coptic, Sanskrit, Pali...
'as a means to clarify religious differences' - That is the purpose of some, but by no means all practitioners of theology; I rather doubt it would even be a majority position.
'and to maintain a dominantly secular concept of faith' - isn't that's a rather sweeping generalisation? It is certainly not NPOV; I find it hard to think of any theologians who would accept it without massive qualifications.
'The concept of "theology" represents an influence of Western academic empiricism and secular Western culture on the religious world'. No it doesn't. If you read the early part of the article on the history of the term, you will see that, in the first place, relevant uses of the term 'theology' were established before 'Western academic empiricism' etc. existed, and that the term is now used for a wide variety of practices/discourses, only some of which are covered by your comment. If you want to add a discussion about the 'Western empiricism' inherent in some dominant forms of theology, put it later in the article as a separate point, and back it up properly: don't put it here in the header.
'Hence the term generally refers to religious education in the Western world'. No. Contemporary use of the term is broader than that - as is discussed later on in the article.
'in accordance with both the societal norms of Western-style academic inquiry'. No, again. This is true only of some of the discourses/practices which these days get identified as theology. For instance, try asking about the practice of theology in Orthodox Christianity: you would find great resistance from many practitioners to the idea that 'theology' is predominantly a Western-style academic discipline.
'Western theological traditions have developed according to predominanty Christian and Jewish beliefs'. What are you claiming here? If by 'Western theological traditions' you mean the 'Judeo-Christian tradition' or something similar, this is a tautology. If you don't mean that, what do you mean?
'and in most cases study is directly tied to evangelism'. Simply untrue. A large number of those working in theology departments or faculties in Western Europe or the States would deny this claim vociferously.
'Students in theology often seek to become religious clergy.' This is discussed later on in the article, and the situation is complicated. True, some forms of theological education or training are specifically designed as part of training for religious ministry of some kind; but some are not. I teach in a theology department, for instance, where the overwhelming majority of students are NOT seeking to become 'religious clergy' - and that is not untypical of such Departments in my country.
'Within the "theological" framework, student theologians may engage in extra-traditional religious discourse and navigate many of the sectarian and denominational differences between various doctrines (dogma), while remaining as faithful believers in their respective traditions.' This is a somewhat more valid point, and could perhaps become a section further down in the article; it certainly doesn't belong here in the header. But it is very unclear as written - and implicitly generalises far too much about what theology looks like and how it works. In some contexts where theology is taught, what you say might be true; in some it is not, and in some it wouldn't even make sense.
'In contrast, a theocracy asserts that religious spirituality should have dominance over and within all matters of government, including academic study.' This too is very unclear. I presume that you are wanting to contrast theological study within secular regimes with theological study within 'theocratic' regimes, claiming that the former is characterised by a degree of pluralism or at least attention to differing views that is absent from the latter. However, as well as being expressed very unclearly, it is not clear that this claim is true. There are forms of theology in secular regimes which are distinctly non-pluralist; there are forms of theological study in religious regimes which are pluralist. If you want to make this article explore this point in more detail, why not try adding to the discussion of academic freedom and confessional basis later on in the article, rather than putting this rather misleading statement here?
'Such a system of predefined laws must accept local sectarian views as their foundation, and thus differences tend to be undebated, unresolved, and increasing due to natural cultural divergences.' You are making a whole set of problematic claims here: (i) that religious regimes use 'predefined' laws; (ii) that such laws must be 'sectarian'; and (iii) that such systems rule out debate and change. We could debate each of these, if you like - in my opinion each of them is wrong, or at best misleading - but I'm very unclear what place you think they have in a top-level definition of 'theology'. Haven't you got off topic?

--mah 08:54, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Citing to the Bible[edit]

As a recent participant in the TfD dicussion on whether {{Bibleverse}} and {{Bibleref}} should be deleted, I wanted to make sure you were aware of the new discussion at Wikipedia:Citing sources/Bible. The goal of these discussion is to resolve the concerns raised re GFDL, use of an external cite, etc. Additionally, this page should serve as a location for recording research about the different websites that provide online Bible information. Please edit the summary and join the discussion - thx Trödel 15:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Malicious Code[edit]

Hey, sorry, I couldn't figure out why you made a wikilink of malicious code as it's a redlink. Should it be a redirect? Cheers, (Please Reply on my talk page) -- Tompsci 00:11, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SIL[edit]

I posted why I reverted on the talk page on 23 June, under 'rewrite of opening section'. You must have missed them. --Drmaik 19:13, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eon8[edit]

I just wanted to let you know. I am pushing 40, and I am a PhD, and I voted to keep the Eon8 article. TruthCrusader 20:25, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Einstein patentoffice.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Einstein patentoffice.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Shizhao 18:08, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

--Shizhao 18:08, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Slavery and religion[edit]

I just edit conflicted with you there. I'll get out of the way. I suggest archiving much of the talk page, leaving the AFD related items on the current page. GRBerry 22:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Integration announced at Village Pump[edit]

I just announced our project to some of the groups at Village Pump. I've also added a "reviewed" category to handle articles and categories that are processed/completed. Cwolfsheep 12:35, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

of interest[edit]

Thought you mind find this MfD of interest. PT ^(s-s-s-s) 22:31, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]