User talk:TreveX/Archive1

LRA article

Good job on Lord's Resistance Army! It's nice to have someone checking my facts and adding updates. Cheers, BanyanTree 23:38, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It should pass within the week, though I'm a little concerned about having too few votes. I don't see a reason for it not to go on the front page, hopefully in a few weeks. According to Wikipedia:Tomorrow's featured article, the first open day is the 22nd. Cheers, BanyanTree 17:41, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Nice job on Districts of Uganda. I was totally intimidated by the number that was needed.  ;) I've made some tweaks to Template:Uganda districts and am not sure, in particular, how that last looks. Feel free to revert any and all changes. Cheers, BanyanTree 20:42, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Thanks a lot for your work with Districts of Uganda! Good job. (Not to rain on your parade, but if you're looking for work now, check out Departments of Benin and the needed Subdivisions of The Gambia for starters) --Dmcdevit 01:12, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Ugandan music

Why the category switch at Music of Uganda? All the other Category:Music by nations are the other way around (exception being Granada). Tuf-Kat 19:52, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

Fair enough. I didn't realise there was such a precedent. All other country-related articles are usually titled "ASPECT of COUNTRY". I'll change it back. TreveX^talk 19:55, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Ethnic groups of Uganda

Please stop adding Buganda, Ankole, Bunyoro and others article to Category:Ethnic groups of Uganda, they are not ethnic groups but kingdoms. - SimonP 20:10, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, they are kingdoms. But these kingdoms map directly with their ethnically distinct inhabitants with language, cultural norms and physical characteristics which predominate in that area. Ideally, there would be articles for the Ganda, Soga, Nyoro, Nkole etc but many of these haven't been created. I thought placing the kingdom articles in the category:Ethnic groups of Uganda category was a good idea for the meantime and where the kingdom has its own ethnic group. This is especially useful as when articles such as Baganda currently redirect to Buganda. TreveX^talk 22:48, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

I'm not going to revert you again, but I don't think anyone would accept this format if it were a western country. It would seem very odd to see Brittany and Duke of Brittany in an Ethnic groups of France category, for instance. To me it seems fairly pejorative to be labeling kingdoms with centuries of history as mere "ethnic groupings." - SimonP 02:57, May 5, 2005 (UTC)

As to the boxes Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and series boxes is official policy. Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries is not official but is one of the most rigourously enforced Wikiproject guidelines. - SimonP 02:59, May 5, 2005 (UTC)

They both kingdoms with centuries of history and ethnic groupings. I agree, Buganda (kingdom), Luganda (language) and Ganda (tribe) should be seperate articles but this will have to do for the time being. The Brittany comparison does not hold as Brittany people are not ethnically distinct from the rest of French people. To be perfectly frank, you don't seem to understand the basic facts as regards the Ugandan tribes/kingdoms. As for your removal of the commonwealth template, I think its pretty silly to do this without any consensus at all and after real resistance in article talk pages and on your talk page. TreveX^talk 03:06, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

The Bretons meet every definition of an ethnic group that I have ever read and they are listed on our List of ethnic groups. What is you definition of ethnic group?

There is a strong consensus on the basic template policy as recently rewritten at Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and series boxes. If one also had to obtain consensus before removing every template the process would take months, that is why we have higher level policies so that we don't need to have the same debate over and over. Also I dislike your assertion that I am some interloper while you are the one working on Uganda pages. If you look at who created pages like Bunyoro, Ankole, and Mwanga II of Buganda, you will see that I have been working in this area for months. - SimonP 15:39, May 5, 2005 (UTC)

Everything in a Commonwealth country is part of the Commonwealth, e.g. Category:Buildings and structures of Canada refers to buildings and structures that are in the Commonwealth. To be fully functional the categories need to be on the category page. They can perhaps be on both, as with Category:European Union and Category:Arab League but I personally see this as needless duplication. - SimonP 19:26, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

What lost functionality? If the Commonwealth is actually an important institution to these countries the article on the country should mention it and thus link to Commonwealth of Nations, which already has a perfectly good list. No one goes to the page of one of these countries specifically looking for a list of Commonwealth members. They go to the Commonwealth page for that. The time they become interested in what other countries might be members of the Commonwealth is after they read the bit about the country in question being a Commonwealth member. Thus this is the best location for a link, and due to Wikipedia linking policy there will always be one. - SimonP 19:44, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

The page you refer to already seems to have answered this question. "A clean example of this principle is the fact that there are no articles in Category:Countries. All the country articles are members of subcategories of it." - SimonP 19:49, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

The difficulty is that there are hundreds of organizations and in the long run having categories for each of them won't work. For now, however, your system is a fair compromise. - SimonP 20:14, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

Image:C17atEntebbe.jpg

Is this a US government picture? If so, the picture is PD. However, if it is not, I fail to see how it is fair use. Burgundavia 21:25, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

It is a US dept of defense picture.[1] I will changed the image tag to {{PD-USGov-Military}}. TreveX^talk 22:54, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Blessed are the peacemakers...

Hi TreveX,

Thanks for injecting a little calm over at Yoweri Museveni. I was getting quite frustrated. Cheers, BanyanTree 18:27, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Might want to ask BanyanTree

With a cursory look, it appears this isn't just simple vandalism. BanyanTree is already involved, so if you're asking for a long term block, you might want to go to him. I'll put in a temp block for now, though. CryptoDerk 20:58, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

This is not vandalism, and doesn't come close to meeting blocking criteria. See Wikipedia:Vandalism, Wikipedia:Blocking policy. Sam Spade 21:14, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps this NPOV dispute is not strictly vandalism, but he has violated 3RR, which can in itself lead to a block. This user has also made a statement of intent to continue reverting Yoweri Museveni in spite of repeated attempts by other users to reason with him:

This is the basis upon which Bamboo and associates will continue uploading the same article on Museveni and will ignore the attempts to censure our contribution on Museveni. (from Talk:Yoweri Museveni#comment)

Several attempts to engage constructively with this user were made. Unfortunately, he chose to continue reverting and using sockpuppets to make further reverts. I agree that this may not meet the requirements for a strict definition of vandalism, but having violated 3RR and considering the wider context, I think a 24-hour block is fair. TreveX^talk 21:28, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

I appreciate your graciousness regarding the vandalism mixup. I would ask however that you assume good faith on bamboo's part, that it is entirely possible he has real friends helping him edit (not a big stretch really) rather than sockpuppets. Also, I would like to see the 3RR explained to him, as it isn't really supposed to be enforced on users unaware of it, and without a warning ahead of time. He may (assume good faith :) not have known about that policy. Thank you again for your efforts to conform this new user to our wiki process, I likewise see great potential in him as a contributor. Cheers, Sam Spade 09:23, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Category:Tribes of Uganda

Hello TreveX. I'm sorry to bother you but I thought you'd want to know that the Tribes of Uganda category is being considered for deletion. You might want to leave a note on the discussion page or its deletion entry. MadMax 21:59, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

BBC Master Images

Image:BBCMasterCompact.jpg and Image:BBCMaster.gif are very good images, and almost seem like publicity images, unless they are just really good personal photos. Did you take them yourself? How did they come to be PD? boffy_b July 4, 2005 15:27 (UTC)

Hutu

TreveX, if you feel like it, you might want to check out this recent addition to Hutu. I've skimmed through it briefly but I don't really have the time to read it closely and frankly I don't know so much of the conflict. From what I know, it looks a little POV to me. I've also asked BanyanTree to look into it. Kind regards, — mark ✎ 6 July 2005 21:01 (UTC)

It's been taken care of. — mark ✎ 7 July 2005 20:25 (UTC)

No, that's OK. I brought you some flowers because you were not feeling well. All the best! — mark ✎ 20:53, 9 July 2005 (UTC)

Thank you Mark, they're lovely! TreveX^talk 11:28, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Image:London2005Bus.jpg

Just so you know, I've marked the image Image:London2005Bus.jpg as a copyright violation and listed it on Wikipedia:Copyright_problems. Although you can claim fair use, I don't really believe that's justified in this case, particularly because the BBC is actively, currently deriving economic value from the image, and because the image is displayed on the Main Page. I hope you don't take offense. Deco 21:18, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Category:Ethnic groups of Uganda

Hello TreveX, thank you for your welcome message. I have been doing what I can to contribute to Uganda on Wikipedia. I will attempt to expand on 'Ethnic groups of Uganda' (I prefer tribes but will concede to common opinion). Your expertise will be welcome. Ezeu 05:23, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

AIDS-prevention in Uganda

Nice work in making that section more concise — I'm not too coherent at the moment, I'm afraid. Best, El_C 13:26, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! TreveX^talk 13:34, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Copyright

Hi, I was reading back through the copyright tags talk page and I saw your query about the graphs you have used in AIDS in Africa, particularly Image:UNAIDS 2004 HIVAfrica85-03.png, tagged with {{unimage}}. My understanding of the fair use rules is that anything that we could easily reproduced from freely available data cannot be claimed as fair use. So technically this image is a copyvio. The template as written is also quite misleading, since most UN material (there is some variation between the agencies) is copyrighted. Persimmion would have to be granted on a case by case basis and be compatible with the GFDL and therefore can not be assumed; and since there is a general misunderstanding about what is and is not fair use and the template does not make the distinction clear, I think this template either needs to be rewritten or deleted. This kind of mess is why copyrights are evil. --nixie 07:42, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

uganda is not as nice as u think

uganda is currently having a civil war

search: Invisible Children