User talk:Chaos syndrome/Archive2

Welcome back!

I'm pleased to see you've returned. It is unfortunate that Devon quickly resumed his old activities; thank you for bringing it to my attention. I was forced to reblock him. — Knowledge Seeker দ 04:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I see. Though I wouldn't really call it a sockpuppet, since Devon stated it was he. I'll try keeping an eye on the account to ensure it doesn't cause any trouble. — Knowledge Seeker দ 08:49, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Binary stars

Hi, I've got some table markup on the 55 Cancri page for handling RA/Dec in the case of multiple components - I personally prefer to keep the format as (RA,Dec), (RA,Dec) rather than (RA1,RA2), (Dec1, Dec2). Any thoughts - I'm considering turning this into a template.

I'd say that it's a fairly rare case where you have binary components that are so widely separated, so I'm not sure how much use a template would be. I guess it's a matter of personal taste really, but as long as the data is correct I don't have a preference. Zeta Reticuli, for example, looks fine to me. Thanks. — RJH (talk) 22:07, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:UpsAnd-b.jpg

I could not find this image on the site that you said it was taken from, so I removed the imagevio tag for now. If you could show me where it is from though, I would be happy to delete it. Sorry, -- Where 03:47, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! I have deleted the image. -- Where 13:46, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

IFD

You nominated a number of User:Hurricane Devon's image uploads for deletion because they were claimed under fair use and did not contain rationale. Please note that you can use {{subst:nrd}} to tag them as such and they will be automatically deleted in seven days (see Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#I6). Regards, howcheng {chat} 20:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

D'oh, I forgot about the May 4 cutoff date. My bad. {{frn}} and {{nrd}} do exactly the same thing. We should probably get rid of one. :) howcheng {chat} 20:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, the lack of a fair use rationale can be grounds for deletion. However, many of these (especially those from ESO) happen to be from press releases and can be retagged with {{promotional}} (which I have done). For some of the others, a fair use rationale could easily be written which would save these images -- personally I think this is the better route, as these illustrate the articles very well and add a significant impact to them. The rest will be deleted. howcheng {chat} 20:50, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Extrasolar planets

Hi, I'm the one who promoted the various extrasolar planets to GA status (55 Cancri b, etc.)), and I just wanted to let you know that I appreciate the work done on them. They are good little articles, and are, as far as I can tell, the best single source for readable information on them on the web. I appreciate it when individuals 'adopt' a small set of related articles and keeps them consistent and up to date. Keep up the good work. Phidauex 17:56, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Question regarding APOD copyrights

I must admit I'm not certain if the text is copyrighted -- the only copyright information I found is about images. The website itself is clearly NASA's, which indicates the text is in public domain. Either way, the text is non-encyclopedic and deserves a complete rewrite. Given the peculiarity of V838 Monocerotis, it's a shame it doesn't have a better article.--JyriL ^talk 22:12, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

New Horizons possibly unfree image

Hi, I see you've marked http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:NewHorizons%40Jupiter.jpg as a possibly unfree image and candidate for deletion. Actually, it looks like the image is ok to use (correct source is http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/gallery/artistConcepts/artistConcepts_02.html and seems to be covered by the image use policy at http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/gallery/imageUsePolicy.php) but the credit line seems to need a bit of tweaking. I will make these changes and remove the unfree image template unless i hear otherwise in a day or two. FelineAvenger 04:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Planet in globular

Thanks for the correction to the globular cluster article regarding the pulsar ID. — RJH (talk) 15:37, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

GA vs. FA

I don't have a particularly view on that issue, but you should definitely try getting one of them onto Did you know if you haven't already. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 19:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

HAT-P-1b

Just thought I'd let you know that I think you did excellent work on the HAT-P-1b article. ThreeBlindMice 20:43, 18 September 2006 (UTC)