User talk:とある白い猫/Archive/2006/10

とある白い猫 A Certain White Cat User Page | Office | Talk Page | Bot edits | Sandbox SB2 SB3 JA TR Commons Meta Hello this is an Archive. Please do not edit. You are welcome to post comments regarding material here at my user talk page.

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2005 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2012 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2006 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2013 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2007 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2014 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2008 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2015 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2009 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2016 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2010 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2017 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2011 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2018 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12

——————————————— Archive, October 2006 ——————————————— Fair use rationale for Image:Goddess Relief Office.gif Thanks for uploading Image:Goddess Relief Office.gif. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation 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. This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:06, 1 October 2006 (UTC) Image:Solar sys.png I have used your image and broken it apart to create a more interactive navigation. I was wondering if you could recreate that image adding other notable astronomical bodies such as pluto and other Trans neptunian objects (and perhaps Ceres too). Furthermore, Larger or better spaced images would allow text to be aligned with the images. -- Cat chi? 12:07, 5 October 2006 (UTC) I created this in an earlier revision: Hope its what your after -- Nbound 06:02, 7 October 2006 (UTC) It is certainly nicer and more detailed, but is it possible to make it wider (so that pluto is easier to click)? Also you may want to upload multiple files like I did. :) -- Cat chi? 12:59, 7 October 2006 (UTC) just double sized... cant get it to sharpen without looking like crap though -- Nbound 13:29, 7 October 2006 (UTC) The wideness is better. However what I really want to do is put text below the individual planets as caption so each image should have enough wideness for that. You may want to upload multiple images like I did. See commons:Category:Solar System Chart to see what I mean. I used paint to break them apart but I feel use of a more professional tool would have better end results. If you use a naming convention like I did it would be easier to manage. -- Cat chi? 13:54, 7 October 2006 (UTC) Sorry i honestly dont have the time... but i reckon the easiest way would be to use a spacer image between each pic... though u'd have to get it to match the gradient colour each time... which is why im feelin lazy, that and im sick as a dog, haha- Nbound 14:00, 7 October 2006 (UTC) To be read when you get better: User:Cool_Cat/Sandbox#Solar displays the real template structure I have in mind (I am woking on improving that as well). For it to work properly, I need wider and evenly distributed diagrams of planets. I have no way of doing this myself so that is why I am asking for your assistance. -- Cat chi? 18:56, 11 October 2006 (UTC) Check your sandbox... ive added an idea of possible navigation: Basically-> Asteroid pic (link to asteroids)... Ceres in asteroids (link to ceres)... Asteroid pic again It will need work to look right... but it seems a good idea... and could fairly easily be used for Pluto/Eris-- Nbound That can be done yes. No opposition here. Yes it needs more work. :) Is it possible to add stuff like the orth cloud and other similar objects? Also consider coloring the planets and the sun. Mars is predominantly orangish red while the sun is yellow in color. :) -- Cat chi? 13:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC) Hows this for two hours work =) File:Eight Planets colour3.png Shiny coloured planets for everyone =D Cut it up however you see fit... -- Nbound 16:50, 12 October 2006 (UTC) slight changes made by other uses - updating this image appropriately -- Nbound 02:46, 13 October 2006 (UTC) I like the design. Do you think text would fit under the planets? I think it needs to be wider (space between planets) so that text can fit below the image as caption. I'd like you to break the image into smaller peices and experiment weather or not text fits below it. After all, you can actualy fix anything problematic while I cannot. -- Cat chi? 13:02, 13 October 2006 (UTC) It seems the consensus on the template page seems to be against the interactive footer, so i dont really want to waste time (it would take a few hours to perfect) -- Nbound 14:11, 13 October 2006 (UTC) I do not see a reason for their objections as they didnt mention any. So that is by no means that there is a concensus. Wikipedia is not a democracy. The vote has no meaning to me. Regardless the outcome of the vote, proper labeling and spacing of the image would be better. Lets work constructively on what we have. -- Cat chi? 21:40, 13 October 2006 (UTC) Gorani (language)/Well... Actualy the pov rename is approporate as per naming conventions. We avoid unnecesaryly spesific info in ( )'s unless absolutely necesary. -- Cat chi? 01:56, 9 October 2006 (UTC) There's a big controversy over the Altaic languages, but most articles link to that page, not the Altaic hypothesis article... :-/ —Khoikhoi 02:09, 9 October 2006 (UTC) I do not believe that contravercy is anyway related to the "Gorani" page. -- Cat chi? 02:11, 9 October 2006 (UTC) I never said it was, I was merely giving an example. —Khoikhoi 02:19, 9 October 2006 (UTC) Ah I see. Care to elaborate? I am not certain what I am looking for. :) -- Cat chi? 09:35, 9 October 2006 (UTC) Not really (it's 2:38 AM over here). ;-) Kolay gelsin. —Khoikhoi 09:38, 9 October 2006 (UTC) Sleep is a poor substitute to cafeine.... :P -- Cat chi? 09:42, 9 October 2006 (UTC) Indeed! —Khoikhoi 09:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC) Working Man's Barnstar and Barnstar of Diligence Hi! evrik suggested I contact you since you're associated with WikiProject Awards. After some discussion about changing the name of the "Working Man's Barnstar" to something gender inclusive, we realized that there is not much distinction between "Working Man's Barnstar" and the "Barnstar of Diligence". In order to avoid an overly-PC rename of "Working Man's", and given that there's not much difference between the two anyway, I thought it'd be best to conflate the two awards and have only "The Barnstar of Diligence." Your opinion on the matter would be much appreciated! The discussion can be found here. Cheers! -- Merope Talk 17:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC) Username blabber blabity blab Kú Máo(Shanghainese Hanyu Pinyin) *Pronounced "Koo Maoy" with a little pop in the "aoy" part. Hope you add that to the list...--*SMILYS FOR ALL!* Da.Tomato.Dude 22:10, 12 October 2006 (UTC) WP:POINT Please do not disrupt wikipedia to illustrate a point. I am not exactly sure what the problem is but I presume it has something to do with "Palestine". -- Cat chi? 22:43, 13 October 2006 (UTC) it's not WP:POINT, it's WP:NPOV. Iraqi Kurdistan is too an autonomy. Amoruso 22:59, 13 October 2006 (UTC) Iraqi Kurdistan does not claim to be an independent country now do they? I can list several hundered autonomous regions in europe and amercias alone. We only list countries (defacto or not) in nav templates. -- Cat chi? 23:04, 13 October 2006 (UTC) it has nothing to do with soverginity. it's an autonomy of a seperate PEOPLE who want to control their own lives. It fits the template. Amoruso 23:06, 13 October 2006 (UTC) I am with you on this one Refering to the edit war between A Man in Black (AKA AMIB) and Cool Cat. So, AMIB decides that purging the Deus Ex set of articles isn't enough. I'm with you on this one, AMIB purged a lot of fiction based articles on Deus Ex and we have been having to restore all that he destroyed. He says that it is cruft and\or not fit for an encyclopedia, but he is causing more harm than good in a already vunable encylopedia. -Dynamo_ace Talk I have attempted to revert the template which he has also defaced. -Dynamo_ace Talk So, Cool Cat, what do we do. I have tried to contact another admin on this and he refused to mediate. So our only hope is to make AMIB realise that with great power comes great responsablity and that he shouldn't be purging things without reason and a open mind. I do have to say though, i pefered the screencaps in the infoboxes and not the DVD covers. -Dynamo_ace Talk Oh My Goddess! images Here is what I hoped to do... This is somewhat a little history lesson. When I started writing about the series I wasn't even aware of the OVA, mini and manga series. I later realised that the series is too vast for a single person to write about. I simply didn't have the time to expand all AMG serries related articles. I have a mental idea on how I want to use each and every image. On occasions I "update" this when better images become avalible. Let me explain, for instance Image:Keiichi Morisato (Oh My Goddess! Manga).png is very important to explain keiichi's extraordinary personality and extraordinary situation. Angels are the "other self" of the host. If you look at Urd, her angel has a black and a white wing representing her true nature. I can give more examples but dont want to spoil it :P It is an excellent series, I highly reccomend it btw. -- Cat chi? 09:33, 15 October 2006 (UTC) I am under the assumption that you are trying to work cooperatively. Is my approach flawed? Why wont you respond? Time is running out and a large number of images are going to be deleted for being orphans because of your actions. -- Cat chi? 15:51, 15 October 2006 (UTC) I understand the importance of the angels, and I'm not ignorant of OMG/AMG. Where were you planning to put the Keiichi/angel image in the article? I offered to undelete it for you on ANI. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:23, 15 October 2006 (UTC) The thing is you caught me at a bad time. I am overloaded in real life so this decreases my productivity. I am also overwhelmed with the wikipedia panel I am working on. Furthermore, this entier issue had been most displeasant for me even though I know that was not your intention. All I ask is for you to understand this. What I planed on doing is explaining Keiichi's involvement on the Angle Eater arc and the later Demon-angel arc. These two after all are probably the most signigicant events through out the manga. The manga image would approporately go aroud there. I was hoping someone would write about all that as I do not want to do all thw work. Infact if you know the series you can do this. :) I have seen your ANB/I post. I'd rather handle the issue on your/my talk page. Both of us are aiming the guns at each other (metaphoricaly speaking), I'll be the first to put my hand off the trigger. Another issue is the existing orphaned fair use images which will be deleted very soon as a result of your modification to the template. I'd recomend restoring the multi-imaged version temporarily and going through the images one by one on my userspace since some of the images are used for material not yet covered such as keiichi and angel image above. It would be counter-productive to rush this issue or for the images to be deleted. -- Cat chi? 20:02, 15 October 2006 (UTC) The problem is that fair-use images can't sit around until they're placed somewhere relevant. They need to be removed until they're made relevant and useful. While I can sympathize with real life intervening, the problem is that Wikipedia can't be an archive of fair-use images that might someday be used. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:05, 15 October 2006 (UTC) The images are all relevant, I didn't randomly uploaded them. As for Keiichi's case, the image is approporate for being the manga version alone. I merely expressed my long term "plans" as you inquired, do not misinterprete my comments. There is absolutely no reason why images cant be investigated on a case by case basis. Please take the necesary mesures to prevent their deletion. I do not have the time to mass write articles and I do not see the reason for the rush. Is wikipedia under attack? So far you have comprimised nothing and to be blunt you have enforced your stance with the admin privilages you were given. All that makes it really frustrating for a seasoned editor as myself. I sincerely hope to see a cooperative enviorment, please pull your finger off the trigger unless you intend to fire. -- Cat chi? 04:35, 16 October 2006 (UTC) You skipped the "placed somewhere" in the sentence above. Cramming four images into the infobox is not placing them somewhere relevant. Yes, the images need to be investigated on a case-by-case basis. Get cracking! All you need to do is put the images somewhere relevant in the articles and we'll get started talking about individual cases. There's no compromise here. All I'm asking of you is the bare minimum; these images can't be in the infobox, feel free to put them anywhere else. I haven't deleted any images save for one image that was unusuable and one image that I've offered to undelete for you if you tell me where you're going to put it. If you can't - or don't, or won't - do that, then the images will be and should be deleted, but I've done nothing to accelerate that deletion save remove some ridiculous galleries crammed into the infobox. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:41, 16 October 2006 (UTC) Can you offer a solution to the edit link problem? (weather its using divs and etc or not). That is why the images were inside the infobox. I can easly put the deleted image to the article but it causes technical issues. One way to do it is to let the images be passed to the infobox yet place them outside of the actual infobox template. But I havent got the slightest idea how. Since you seem to be talented on dealing with templates, I am open to suggestions. -- Cat chi? 04:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC) Um. The only thing I can suggest is that you not use gigantor images in tiny section headings. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:54, 16 October 2006 (UTC) Done. As you can see, the edit link is broken. There is an easy fix for it, I can simply move the image down a bit but that isnt really a fix method I like. on different larger resolutions the edit link still will be misaligned and that bothers me like hell. -- Cat chi? 04:59, 16 October 2006 (UTC) You didn't put the image somewhere relevant; you just placed it beneath the infobox. This is not acceptable. You need to place the image alongside relevant commentary on that image. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:03, 16 October 2006 (UTC) Do you see the misaligned edit link? Forget about copyright issues for a minute. -- Cat chi? 05:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC) Yes. The infobox is causing that. Nothing can be done about it. I'm fully aware that it can cause edit links to get pushed all over the place, but the fact remains that images go in the relevant parts of the body of the article and not crammed into galleries at the beginning or end of the article. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC) Since the probelm is identified I have moved the image to where it always appeared weather or not if it was inside or outside the infobox. It always appeared under Keiichi_Morisato#Personality as the angel is more than relevant to his personality. You basicaly are complaining about where the image's wikicode appears, is that correct? -- Cat chi? 05:11, 16 October 2006 (UTC) If that's where you want the image, it's staying deleted. The personality section doesn't say anything at all about the angel, let alone anything that needs to be illustrated. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:13, 16 October 2006 (UTC) I expanded the section further using the material that was already on the article. That info was originaly with the "personality" section IIRC. Dont exactly know what happened there. As it stands I am not happy with that article and feel it needs work. -- Cat chi? 05:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC) It's less than ideal, but if you're planning to work on the article, I'll restore the image. At least it's somewhere relevant now. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:27, 16 October 2006 (UTC) I intend to expand it. Please understand the amount of info I need to process is a manga that has been around since 1988. So this may take some time. -- Cat chi? 05:47, 16 October 2006 (UTC) Arbitrary edit point Now how do you suggest we tackle the edit link problem? -- Cat chi? 05:49, 16 October 2006 (UTC) We...don't? I don't see that it's in dire need of fixing. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC) Four way talks for the 21dec panel Hi, I'd like to discuss a general outline for the Wikipedia panel as well as other issues.  :) This is what I have at the moment. Feel free to reply, and at least acknowlege you had seen it. Just a reminder: The panel will happen in Ankara, Turkey on 21 Dec 2006. -- Cat chi? 17:02, 20 October 2006 (UTC) Panel Hey Coolcat, I got your note, but it seems that what I'm to talk about has morphed from being a discussion on policy and project goals and various ideas on that (e.g. factions) into a discussion on copyright policies on Wikipedia. I could probably still talk about that, but I don't think it'd be very interesting - copyright and related policy is a fairly dry topic. Any news on funding? Take care. --Improv 08:00, 22 October 2006 (UTC) This isnt fixed. I had to reduce the number of panelists I am to invite to three. If you like to talk about something else, it can easily be adjusted. I just had to give an outline to the people. I did get your name right, right? -- Cat chi? 10:58, 22 October 2006 (UTC) I was wondering if you could write in a paragraph what you'd like to discuss in the panel. I need to submit a general outline of the panel by this monday. -- Cat chi? 00:00, 26 October 2006 (UTC) Misconceptions? See: User:Khorshid/Misconceptions I do not think a userpage is for that stuff... -- Cat chi? 15:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC) I'm not sure that it's strictly innapropriate, though I'm not pleased that it already exists on its own subpage, as well. Have you considered MfD? --InShaneee 15:35, 20 October 2006 (UTC) I was waiting for your review before seeking any kind of action. I do not want to make the nomination myself. How should I proceed? -- Cat chi? 16:04, 20 October 2006 (UTC) Take it to MfD, mention why it was removed from wherever it was removed from, and point out that it already has its own subpage in his userspace. --InShaneee 19:38, 20 October 2006 (UTC) Done. See: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Khorshid/Misconceptions -- Cat chi? 18:37, 21 October 2006 (UTC) Hi, about the "misconceptions" section on your userpage... Firstly I'd like to point out that I also agree that Iran is overdemonised. However I feel a userpage does not exist for one to express political beliefs. I would encourage you to remove it. You can for instance put the content to a blog and link to it in your userpage. The deletion is for the now seemingly obsolite "User:Khorshid/Misconceptions". I would appriciate if you {{db}}'ed it. -- Cat chi? 23:15, 21 October 2006 (UTC) There is nothing political about it. Its just a list of misconceptions.Khosrow II 00:44, 22 October 2006 (UTC) I am sure the US president and/or Fox News would disagree. That makes it political. -- Cat chi? 01:09, 22 October 2006 (UTC) That makes no sense at all. Unless you have a convincing argument, I wont take it off.Khosrow II 03:57, 22 October 2006 (UTC) Look, it is all about perspective. That is what politics is about. I do not have time to "convince" you. It was a mere friendly advice. -- Cat chi? 04:08, 22 October 2006 (UTC) As long as I am not breaking any Wiki rules, I dont have to change something just because a person doesnt like it, because that doesnt make any sense, just dont look at my user page if your offended. If I am breaking any rules, please notify me and give me the link to the rule. Thanks.Khosrow II 04:13, 22 October 2006 (UTC) Wikipedia is not a rule driven comunity we are not a burocracy. If you really are looking for a rule, it can be removed on the basis of wikipedia is NOT a soapbox. Exact quote you mau want to consider is: "You might wish to go to Usenet or start a blog if you want to convince people of the merits of your favorite views." Like I told you, I agree with some of the stuff you are saying there, so I am not offended. However I do feel that would be more approporate off-wikipedia. -- Cat chi? 12:48, 22 October 2006 (UTC) First of all, its sourced, second of all, Fox News or Bush may disagree on almost everything on Wikipedia, both are propagandists anyway. There is nothing political about my User page. You can contend that I cannot even have "I am a proud American and proud Iranian" on my user page on the basis of propaganda if you wanted to. I can probably find something that would seem political to me on many other user's wiki page, it would be pandamoniam.Khosrow II 14:57, 22 October 2006 (UTC) Contient templates {{Africa}} Hi Cool Cat, (moved Template:Countries and territories of Africa to Template:Africa: moving back to proper location) Just noticed your move; please help me understand why "Africa" is this template's "proper location". Thanks, David Kernow (talk) 02:13, 21 October 2006 (UTC) Hi, the intended function of the Continent template navboxes such as {{Africa}}, {{Europe}} etc. was to link to countries (defacto or not) on a spesific continent. There are several reasons for this. Two of the important reasons are: To limit the number of entities that appear on the template for practical purposes: There are way too many countries in africa. POV concerns: Some people decide to add random "territories" of contraversial regions. If official UN territories are allowed, unoficial ones must be allowed as per WP:NPOV which only creates problems. There are probably other reasons but I am at the moment focusing on these two. For teritories a seperate {{Teritories of Africa}} may be used. -- Cat chi? 12:19, 21 October 2006 (UTC) Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately, I don't see how the name "Africa" will dissuade folk intent on adding "entities" and/or territories to this template from doing so. Secondly, when found within code, {{Africa}} does not indicate what aspect/s of Africa the template addresses. As the template (still) carries countries and territories, {{Countries and territories of Africa}} seems particularly appropriate. You may not be aware that {{Navigation Template}} alone does not seem to accommodate smaller screen or window sizes, producing poor linewrap. That, at least, is the result here. As the region names are (currently) no longer aligned, distinguishing between each line of countries/territories is now not so straightforward. I suggest the small images further assisted this useful feature. I am copying the above to Template talk:Africa in the hope other folk may comment. Ok. I'll try to sort this with you w/o involving other parties since so far you sound to be a reasonable person. The intention of contient templates have always been to link to political entities: countries (defacto or not). Yes the template does have teritories which is infact problematic. If we are to include a single teritory, we have to include all of them. Which may not be all that problematic for africa (since there arent that many border disputes in africa) but it is for asia, europe and etc. We have to apply the same standard to all continent templates. I have been meaning to remove (more like move) the continent links from the africa template but didnt really have had the time. I am not sure I understand that. Normaly there should not be a linewarp problem at all. The "navigation template" has a generic fixed div size. Can you provide a screenshot? I am inclined to remove the images with the continent names. They hare already hard to see. If they get any smaller (as they need to), they will become useless so we might as well remove them completely. -- Cat chi? 23:27, 21 October 2006 (UTC) Glad that I seem reasonable – so far...! <chuckle> The intention of contient templates have always been to link to political entities: countries... Understood. In that case, suggest these template names become {{Countries of X}}. Meanwhile, I'd steer away from referring to them as "political entities"; some folk may take exception to either or both these words, especially if they live in or know a "country" with a complicated history. (Perhaps this is so with yourself and Belgium...?) ...there should not be a linewarp problem at all ... Can you provide a screenshot? See Image:Screenshot showing template.jpg. I am inclined to remove the images with the continent names... The images may indeed be a cosmetic extra; first, though, I'm more concerned that, in a template such as {{Africa}}, it's now not so easy to see which line refers to which (compass-based) region, as both their alignment and thumbnail images have gone. Hope you understand what I mean. Yours, David (talk) 00:40, 22 October 2006 (UTC) Belgiums case is relatively straight forward when in contranst with places like the balkans or middle east. I intentionaly used the referance "politcal entities" since for instance Taiwan is no county as far as China is concerned. Infact China considers Taiwan to be a part of itself. Taiwan claims to be in control of all of mainald china and does not consider it to be a country. What is a country and what isn't can be very complicated by itself so we do not need "territories" and "wanabe countries" such as Scandinavia, Basque, Kurdistan, Assyria, Greater Armenia (last three overlaps actualy) and others on the continent templates. I'd like to evade a {{Countries of X}} since people will object to defacto countries then. It causes problems even though it shouldn't. I have updated template africa in a bold move. I intend to do the same to Oceania template. Removing images and teritories would fix the linewarp problem. -- Cat chi? 01:07, 22 October 2006 (UTC) (resetting indentation) I intentionaly used the referance "politcal entities" since... I'm intrigued by your approach as the kind of examples that have arisen (Belgium, Taiwan, etc) are one reason why I feel avoiding descriptions such as "political" might be wise – this does not mean, however, that I'm opposed to your approach as (1) I'm still learning about it and (2) it may well be an improvement! I'd like to evade a {{Countries of X}}... I hope you understand, however, my point that seeing say {{Africa}} while editing a page is not as useful as (say) {{Countries of Africa}} unless you already know (well) what the template contains. My experience thus far indicates that succinct but informative template names (or category names, or...) outweighs any misguided amendments people may or may not make to the templates themselves; if that were a significant problem, I'd discourage making it (too) easy for people to edit templates by including {{Tnavbar}}s in them!  Also, a <noinclude> explanation on the template's could also serve to dissuade mistaken edits, or be something to which people could be referred. I have updated template africa in a bold move... Now seen. Suggest for now that, as the country names are in a small font-size, the bullet-point dividers are correspondingly smaller, i.e. &middot;s. Also, recommend the syntax [[Country]]&nbsp;· to ensure consistent linewrapping. Yours, David (talk) 01:28, 22 October 2006 (UTC) Oh, I am merely trying to be carefull :) I wouldn't dare put "political entities" in the template, I merely use it for the sake of argument here. Perhaps that would be better given that logic. How about {{Countries in X}}? You are welcome to do all that however I don't particuarly understand the reason for &nbsp. -- Cat chi? 01:37, 22 October 2006 (UTC) Re 1. Understood. I wonder if using "political entities" is wise in any context, but for now am happy to let that debate rest. Re 2. I believe the geographic / country subdivision preference is for "of", but may be mistaken; what knowledge I have of naming conventions etc etc is primarily via WP:CfD. Whether "in" or "of", however, either would make the template's name informative and can always be switched later. Re 3. Will do. The reason is to avoid divider characters (bullets, middots, vertical-lines) appearing at the beginnings of lines. Unless you fear making unnecessary contributions to these templates, perhaps what might be best is if you format them in the way you feel is most effective, then I (and hopefully others...) provide feedback...?   Yours, David (talk) 01:49, 22 October 2006 (UTC) PS Re divider characters, do you like me prefer middots or bullets as being less obtrusive than the vertical-line character...? Right. Happy to see that. I think both may be problematic. Cyprus is not in Europe noe is it a part of Europe while it is diplomaticaly considered a part of europe. Oh thats fine. I do not "fear" making edits. Just my enthusiasm had caused problems in the past. :) re P.S.: I'd prefer the larger circle (bullet I presume) over the other two. The verticle line may break the template and the smaller circle is harder to see, especialy on larger resolutions. -- Cat chi? 02:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC) Re 2. Perhaps it's best to stick with "of" for now, as this is the conjunction used by country subdivisions (cf WP:WPCSub). Re 4. I'll keep the templates I've found thus far on my watchlist (plus any similar I find subsequently) and when it looks as if no-one is making any more amendments to them, I'll let you know what I think. Here's another observation already: the {{Africa}} ({{Countries of Africa}}) template may now look compact, but it also looks dense; perhaps too dense. Perhaps some separation by region might assist people consulting it. Since it now includes the NavHead [Hide] function, using a little more space might not necessarily be to its detriment. (Perhaps, however, the current non-stop string of countries is sufficient; I'm just sharing a thought that occurred to me which may be more relevant elsewhere.) Re PS: I was wondering how far your screen/window size and/or resolution might be influencing your formatting... For instance, here is how your talk page looks when I open it in my browser and jump to this discussion – somewhat to the right!  (This is on a 21" monitor at resolution 1152 by 864 with my browser window (Firefox) maximiz/sed. Yes, switching off the sidebar will help, but I (and other folk) don't always wish to browse in this way.)  I grant, however, that middots can appear too insubstantial; unfortunately, as was the case with {{Africa}}, bullets appear too boldly, detracting from their role as dividers. I had toyed with the idea of creating a {{·}} template to produced bold middot characters (·) but then thought the occurrence of many such templates (e.g. as would be the case in {{Africa}}) might make undue demands. On the other hand, I guess the vertical-line template {{!}} is used heavily... What do you think...?  Do you reckon people would accept {{·}}...?   Yours, David (talk) 02:34, 22 October 2006 (UTC) Re 2.:Well, honestly speaking I do not care either way. My only concern is people complaining later on. Re 4.:I merely listed them in an alphabetical manner. If there is a better way to do this, I wouldnt object to it provided we dont deal with territories again. :) Re P.S.: Whenever I design a template, I design it for a 800 x 600 resolution. I however causaly work with 1024 x 768. My userpage is unnecesarily wide atm due to an image on a debate a bit higher. (the 3rd solar system image I believe). Normaly it doesnt crate an issue. I'll correct this. I still think dark larger bullets ("•") would be better. They look fine to me. On my screen (17" - 1024 x 768) a <small>ified "·" is very hard to see. I believe it occupies a single pixel. So for all practical purposes, it is not there. -- Cat chi? 02:52, 22 October 2006 (UTC) Re 2: Go with "of" and redirect any flak my way! Re 4: I'll let some time go by, then revisit the template (and siblings) in situ somewhere and see what I make of it. Re resolutions/current state of your talk page: understood. Re bullets etc: I agree that middot can seem too small or insubstantial. On the other hand, bullets seem to prominent, especially in templates using smaller-sized fonts. My preference in lieu of a character midway between them is the middot; but do you think a "bold middot" template {{·}} (producing ·) has any mileage...?  Do you reckon you or other editors would balk at seeing (multiple instances of) this template within a template...?  (Don't worry, I won't hold you to your answer; I'm just fishing for feedback...)   Yours, David (talk) 03:09, 22 October 2006 (UTC) Re 2: I'll let you handle it. I cant be doing all of the work ;) Re 4: Thats fine. Re resolutions/current state of talk page: I restructured my talk page per your comment. For me, it is very important for pages I touch to appear perfect on all reasonable resolutions. Re bullets etc: The template is a nice idea. While I do not oppose/object (nor support) the template, from experience I know people will complain for it being redundent. They would argue that a {{.}} is practicaly the same amount of work as '''.''' -- Cat chi? 04:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC) Re 2: Happy to oblige. (Is there a single category in which these templates reside...?) Talk page looks dandy now. (Hope your Wikimood improves soon!) Re middot template as redundant: Yes, I guess so... Perhaps I should give a trial on a non-major template and see how folk react... Before I forget: Thanks for your time and input to this thread. I appreciate the opportunity to understand something of people's Wikipedia experience. Best wishes, David (talk) 04:27, 22 October 2006 (UTC) Re 2: No such category but see Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries/Templates/Navboxes. I would not mind if you "applied" {{Navigation Template}} to those footer templates. My wikimood can only improve if I run into more people like you. :) -- Cat chi? 04:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC) Re 2: I'll add Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries/Templates/Navboxes toward the top of my slightly-lengthy to-do list. by the time I reach, it'll probably also be a good moment to see how I feel about the {{[[Template:Countries of [Continent]|Countries of [Continent]]]}} templates. (As it was my request, I'll locate and rename these to "Countries of" during my next Wikipedia session.) Re wikimood: Ditto!   Until my report back (or sooner), David (talk) 05:00, 22 October 2006 (UTC) plus {{Oceania}} I notice you have also amended this template in a similar manner. Unfortunately it too now suffers from unmanaged linewrap. However, distinguishing between each line should still be straightforward once this linewrap is addressed, as there is some alignment provided by the images and bold links. As with {{Africa}} above, {{Oceania}} does not indicate the template's content, so recommend {{Countries and territories of Oceania}} or the like. Regards, David Kernow (talk) 20:04, 21 October 2006 (UTC) Copied to Template talk:Oceania. Same as above. It should be about countries only and w/o images. Same reasons. -- Cat chi? 23:27, 21 October 2006 (UTC) Understood; will therefore continue above only. David (talk) 00:40, 22 October 2006 (UTC) Iraqi Kurdistan Why did you revert me? Iraqi Kurdistan as it is is a part of the federal body of Iraq. We certainly do not put {{North America}} on Michigan. -- Cat chi? 14:26, 21 October 2006 (UTC) I see no reason not to define Michigan as part of America, and - even more to the point - I see good reason to define Quebec as a distinct political entity within North America and not only as part of Canada. --Vindheim 16:07, 21 October 2006 (UTC) How about individual counties, cities, and other regions? It is highly redundent to do so and against established concensus on the usage of these templates. You are welcome to define Iraqi kurdistan as a part of Middle east and asia or Michigan as a part of North America but you can do that with a simple sentence without using the template. If it is not linked on the table it really should not be used. -- Cat chi? 16:12, 21 October 2006 (UTC) spambot it really wasn't that difficult; I noticed a link from an old thread you'd posted about the spambot in the AN archives. i clicked it and there was spam; so i put db-spam on and that was that. :-) —ptk✰fgs 00:11, 22 October 2006 (UTC) It was so natural to you that you didn't notice... I stand corrected. -- Cat chi? 00:39, 22 October 2006 (UTC) {{Navigation Template}} Hi again already, Cool Cat! (adding margins) I did this as some of the country names in the templates using {{Navigation Template}} looked a little too close to the side of the NavFrame. Hope you approve. Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 02:30, 23 October 2006 (UTC) PS Since Wikipedia templates seem to use sentence-case, how about {{Navigation Template}} → {{Navigation template}} – or even simply {{Navigation}}...? Me likely. I made the move :P -- Cat chi? 09:38, 23 October 2006 (UTC) Thanks for your reply. Do you know the user Tasc...?  Unfortunately I'm in the midst of a tricky situation with him/her as of this very moment. See here and his/her recent User contributions reversions...  David (talk) 09:43, 23 October 2006 (UTC) (For example, one of them was my adding margins to this template...) It is often unnecesarily stressfull to work on templates. I'll join the discussion. -- Cat chi? 20:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC) I really hope I don't regret drawing your attention to this user's behavio/ur. This is a Wikipedia first for me: it's less than 24 hours since I first came by this user and his/her self-centred posts and uncollaborative/incivil manner are already very perturbing. By all means let go if s/he starts refusing to communicate, which unfortunately I fear is a real possibility. I just hope s/he has a more mellow mood somewhere!  Regards, David (talk) 22:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC) I'd be happy to help. Just keep your cool. -- Cat chi? 00:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC) David, let's move this discussion to your talk page, as you're one, who seem to be eager to continue communication. -- tasc wordsdeeds 22:58, 23 October 2006 (UTC) I'd apriciate it if you would adress me on my talk page. -- Cat chi? 00:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC) I've got only templates for you. {{good night}} -- tasc wordsdeeds 00:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC) Oyasuminasai Tasc-san. -- Cat chi? 01:02, 24 October 2006 (UTC) thanks For your superb contribution to Turkish Airlines Flight 1476, I hereby award you this barnstar. Keep up the good work. -- Cat chi? 15:45, 26 October 2006 (UTC) Thanks Cool Cat, i'll try to keep up the good work. İyi geceler --Ugur Basak 18:49, 26 October 2006 (UTC) Wikipedia panel Hi, I am organising a panel about wikipedia in Ankara Turkey 21 dec 2006 as a part of the larger internet conferance. I have compiled some of the information here. I am looking for a person to talk about the foundation. I originaly had Anthere in mind but she seems to be somewhat busy. While she did not decline, I realy have to have a plan B option. Do you have anyone in mind (including yourself) that you could reccomend for the task? -- Cat chi? 28 okt 2006 01:42 (CEST) i'd love to discuss the possibilities and have some ideas in mind, maybe we should irc or email about it first? grtz, oscar 00:12, 28 October 2006 (UTC) I am on IRC right now. I am Kawaii_Neko on irc. --Cat out 28 okt 2006 02:15 (CEST) We can discuss it anytime you like. However I really need to form the panels basic structure by this monday (UTC). -- Cat chi? 28 okt 2006 02:44 (CEST) Fair use images in lists Hello, I see you have contributed your thoughts to Wikipedia talk:Fair use/Fair use images in lists. It's been dead for a while, but I have archived it and taken a new fresh start. I hope this time we will be able to achieve something as I have summarized the main points of both sides (feel free to improve them) and I call you to express your support or oppose on the concrete proposal that I have formulated. Thanks, Renata 02:20, 28 October 2006 (UTC)