Rboatright

/archive Discussions prior to April 2005

Great job

Great job improving the DDNP article. Thanks!--Fourier1789 (talk) 17:40, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Nitram0002 etc

Just in case you thought that incrementing the username really did work for avoiding the Three revert rule, it doesn't. Although I never normally block for excessive reverts, Martin has made so many in the past day or so that I'm blocking his main account for 24 hours for that. I'm adding 3 days for 3 sock puppets (though I think there may have been 4), 1 day for foul personal attacks and 1 for using open proxies. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 19:54, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

yeah, but he just keeps incrementing.

Now that they've closed off open proxies, what can we do to stop his nitro00xx series? Rick Boatright 20:21, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Block on sight. I think it's close to arbcom level now, but I don't want to take on the case myself. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 20:24, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

If you want it to be reverted, just ask on the talk page and somebody else will probably do it. The more people join in and revert the better. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 20:33, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

If you want it protected, I can do that, but I'm reluctant to do so because then nobody would be able to edit the article at all. Ask on WP:RFPP if you want it done anyhow. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 20:36, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

For arbitration, go to WP:RFAR. Copy the template on that page and fill it out, and add it to the list of arbitration requests. Then write a message on his talk page with a wikilink pointint to WP:RFAR. If you do this I will unblock him so that he can respond to the case. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 20:42, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Abdu'l-Baha photo

I have no opinion on the photo (more correctly I don't care enough to form one)I'm simply reverting/banning those socks on sightGeni 22:57, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

New anon user

Just to fill you in the guy has a bit of a bee in his bonnet about the Baha'is for some reason (24.6.117.96 contribs and 67.188.7.127 contribs). I suspect he may well be a Bayani which is interesting. I think he got quite annoyed because I reverted his NPOV edits within 10-15 mins of him submitting them. One or two edits were reasonable though (such as the deleting the bit that said Subh-i Azal "allowed the idea of religious power to pursue his own personal gain").

You'll also notice the start of the article Baha'i election. -- Tomhab 15:38, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Oh great - you've NPOVed it. I've just started the page Bahá'í administration and made it nice, including critisisms. I'd like to migrate the elections page over as its a bit of a "spare limb" page. Bahá'í administration can be built into a generally useful article. -- Tomhab 16:07, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Why Ringo

Well, it's because I done very little edits on Eric Flint's page, and (long ago) I did more to Ringo (IIRC because Ringo had a homepage I could search for bio-info and such). The list is supposed to be only those articles I contributed to in some major way. I added 1632 series to it now. It does seem as the page is not much edited, though :( I expected more barflies would edit it... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 23:08, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome

It's appreciated ChristianEdwardGruber 15:31, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Outdated Talk Pages

What's the purpose of keeping outdated talk pages? I can understand keeping them if information/questions on them hasn't been answered/fulfilled, but once all questions/requests have been answered by the article there isn't really a useful purpose to keep the old messages around. If someone wants to see the old talk page, he/she can simply go to the history. The page in question I'm specifically referring to is Talk:U.S._five-dollar_bill.

DieYuppieScum June 15, 2005

Duplicate Citation in Aurangzeb

The citation was not an insertion, it was copied from further down the article and put in a out of context manner. Please check the article, you'd see the citation appropriately done in a later section in the existing version. thanks. --Ragib 18:19, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You added inserted the duplicate comment quite some time ago, would you mind removing the duplicated comment by Richards? The comment can be found in a later section of the article in the appropriate context. I do not want to touch your edit, without violating the 3RR, so can please you take a look at the article and undo the duplication your edit added? Thanks. --Ragib 21:39, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the work on Aurangzeb

Hi, Just wanted to tell you that I appreciate the work you are doing there. I would have participated in cleaning up, but since Nemonoman (talk · contribs) has specific objections to my editing styles, I better not start a revert-war. I hope, as a neutral observer, you'd make the article as NPOV as possible. Thanks for the work on Shah Jahan too, keep up the good work. --Ragib 4 July 2005 04:50 (UTC)

Brown

Good work on Brown v. Board. I don't know enough about Gebhart v. Belton to be useful -- Jmabel | Talk July 8, 2005 21:20 (UTC)

Brown v. Board of Education

You Rick Boatright ask: "Why did you capitalize African-American?" (in Brown v. Board of Education)

I capitalized it (and put in a hyphen) because that's the way the term is styled in the cited Wikipedia reference African-American_history. -- User 157.193.53.49, 14 July 2005.

"Lay judges"

I agree. And I give you a 30! PS-I debated "national circuit" at Glenbrook South and Woodward Academy, and this type of arrogance pisses me off too. Tfine80 02:10, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Fudge Family

I'm dying of curiosity: why have you redirected this to Thomas Moore? Gamaliel 00:21, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Barnstars

Barnstar of Diligence for work on the Bahá'í Pages

For services rendered to the Bahá'í pages (and there are a bewildering array of very obscure ones) I, MARussellPESE, present Rboatright the Barnstar of Diligence which is awarded here in recognition of a combination of extraordinary scrutiny, precision and community service. These pages are the better for your services.

Also awarded to, in no particular order: PaulHammond, Occamy, Geni, Rboatright, and Tomhab.

Baha'i Faith wikinews

Rick,

Can I ask your advice on a wiki project I'm thinking of starting? I've noticed you seem to have quite a bit of experience on the Baha'i Faith wikipedia pages so I would apreciate any guidance / thoughts you might have.

The project is along the lines of the www.yahoogroups.com/Bahaimonitor egroup and the existing wikinews project for Quakers. The idea is to publish news stories in two categories:

1) Where newspapers have reported a Baha'i story (e.g. The Scotsman re the new Baha'i Centre in Edinburgh)

2) Original reporting, e.g. of consultations at National Convention or results of elections.

At the moment I'm wondering:

1) Would this sort of project be welcomed by the wikimedia community 2) Would there be much interest in reading such articles 3) Would there be much help collaborating writing these articles 4) How would the wider Baha'i community react - e.g. would the institutions be negative, would srb help in publicising/supporting it (I notice you say you're a moderator)

Any indicators you could give me wodl be most appreciated!

AndrewRT 21:56, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi there. Did anything come of this idea? I currently have Google News list articles on the Baha'i Faith. If I knew there was a place I could add them to, I'd love to help. Yours Jlavezzo 19:26, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Am I being serious though?

I don't want to sound like I'm trying to be funny, but have you ever thought about contributing a photo' of the Westboro Baptist Church compound? It's text-only description can let a reader's imagination run wild and perhaps a picture could stop one from thinking of it as being far more "impressive" than it truly is. - Aaron Jethro 15:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm with Aaron. I'd like to add, you're really brave, to practice Baha'i near that jack@$$.--Jnelson09 19:50, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

New article

I've just created an article, Bahá'í literature, that could probably use your input. It's based on the big bibliography I've been keeping on my talk page and thought deserved an article of it's own. It should dovetail into the other individual articles well. MARussellPESE 20:12, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:TopekaFlag.png

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:TopekaFlag.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.

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. Rossrs 14:45, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Pipefish.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Pipefish.png. 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. Shyam ^(T/C) 01:45, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Autostereogram

I've nominated Autostereogram for Featured Article status, and I see from the talk page that you were quite involved with creating the fantastic article that is there now. I thought you'd like to know, both for self-gratification and so that you have a chance to take part in the process. I don't think I know enough about the subject to address many of the issues that could be raised, especially as I don't see any problems with it at all! Skittle 16:06, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Us bahai how.jpeg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Us bahai how.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -SCEhardT 03:52, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Bahai-how panama.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bahai-how panama.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -SCEhardT 03:54, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Bahai how kampala.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bahai how kampala.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 18:42, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

P.S. This also applies to Image:Bahai how samoa.jpg

Hi Rick,

I don't know if the stuff above is still current, but a Baha'i who puts her photos on Flickr a lot, Laili Towfiq, has several outstanding pictures of the Mothertemple of Africa . She may be interested in contributing them to Wikipeadia.

Also on a slightly related note, I found that a large portion of my project on the House of Worship for Ishkabad had been archived by Casper Voogt, with my name spelled wrong. I've put them up at Lavezzo.com. The important thing here is that I've got the bibliography back, so citations for photographs are possible. See my article on it on my blog. Jlavezzo 19:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

No pages on some prominent Baha'is

Hi Rick, I've dropped a couple comments in lines above, but the main reason I came to your talk page is because I couldn't find a page on Eric Dozier. I have a feeling there are several other noteable Baha'is who could have pages as well. Particularly performing artists who might be touring where a Wikipeadia page on them would be appriciated by someone who didn't know them who might be thinking of attending a show.

Is there a list somewhere of like requested pages or something of this sort or have I just found ANNOTHER project for my non-existant free time?

Jlavezzo 19:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Image publication date impossibility

Hi. Way back in 2003, you claimed Image:Bahai how ashkabad.jpg, which you uploaded, was published before 1900. This is clearly impossible, since the building was only constructed in 1908 (see Bahá'í House of Worship). It still may be PD, but it has to have been published before 1923; since the building was still standing many years after 1923, this may not be the case. If you have any verifiable knowledge of when it was published, it'd be much appreciated. Cheers. Telso 09:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Spam in University of Saint Mary (Kansas)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on University of Saint Mary (Kansas), by 66.93.209.195 (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because University of Saint Mary (Kansas) is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting University of Saint Mary (Kansas), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate University of Saint Mary (Kansas) itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 23:34, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Your deletion review request

Per your request at Deletion Review, I have copied the text from the deleted page University of Saint Mary (Kansas) and posted it in a new page in your user space. You can find the article User:Rboatright/USMK. This page sounds does sound like it was copied directly from a college brochure. If you plan to re-create the article, please write an objective and comprehensive article on the college. When you are finished with this user sub-page, place the tag {{db-userreq}} (user-requested deletion) at the top of the page and send me a message, and then I will delete if for you. If you have any questions, please leave me a message on my talk page. ●DanMS • Talk 04:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Can you check over

... the technical issues/history reported in Baen Books (specifically {{Baen's Bar}}), as reconstituted from the fiery deletionist's inferno AND in particular, see what needs changed to reflect the new software. I figure I didn't break Jim Baen too badly, but if you feel like checking that, or expanding, t'would be good too. Drop me a ping on my talk when you get this, please. Thanks (I'm w/o email at the moment, pending construction completion!) // FrankB 16:47, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I wasn't too worried about it, as so much tech-speak is just gobble-gobbles to those of us in ignorance, but it's good to cross the eyes and dot one's tees! I was more worried you'd be a long time seeing the above message!

Take some time to explore 1632 series and 1632 series templates and pass the word to any barflies you know that contribute here. Little by little, writing here about 1632 matters is getting much easier with the section linking templates I've been putting up... synopses and character sketching are getting downright easy. 1632 series battles and 1632 institutions provide a lot of valuable "glue" allowing much simplified decriptive verbiage... and so forth. I've even figured on splitting the characters articles in the template set, and made it so when that happens, things work out quickly. But the bottle neck is getting synopses together...

You REALLY need a preview and two step save facility process on messaging on ericflint.net. I think I posted a "response" message by "laptop accident", so to speak, which if so, ends in mid word as my fat fingers either dragged down to the save button, or hit a control code and aborted after oh, ten minutes of effort... Then I couldn't relocate the post to which I was replying... which is the guy (do recall the message was numbered ca. 45-46) waxing enthusiastically about calculus and mathematicians and the potential for stories... he even gave some ages for some of the polymaths of the day. If you see that, revise and edit the end for me if you can... that was pretty much the last sentence and it should be clear what I was saying. [duh... submit to the GG's!] And again, on the bar edit, thanks! [T'would be nice if you can provide a link to the beginning of the snippets chain as well... for those of us who tune in late and rarely!] ttfn! // FrankB 19:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Another need

My computer downloads and printed copies are walled off behind a plastic barrier and inaccessible to me for the moment... Can you ask Paula G. to drop a list of stories with authors for the GG's including and past Grantville Gazette V [contrast with the TOC here]... which was the issue when the title only Table of Contents "style" began without any "by Loren Jones", "by Annette M. Pederson", etc. This would be a big help as I could get together the tables on 1632 writers in one swell foop a good month before I can get back to my desktop's hard drive or paper copies; just have her drop a text file in/on my talk and I'll park it properly. The other factor in this is technical... the {{32stories}} template was causing a recursive bloat and hitting it's head on pre-expansion limits on a page... The sooner I get most stuff up using that, the surer I can be sooner our efforts to fix the problem are thankfully far in the rear view mirror... or need to come up with a plan "D" instead.

With that done, I'll make a pass through all the print publications and bring those up to snuff by the time my office is back together. Or at least progress along the lines of that goal. 1634: The Galileo Affair is a disgrace, given the lag time, and I know I just stubbed in next to nothing on 1634: The Bavarian Crisis! Feel free to tell Eric and Jimbo they should both pay me better! <g> Thanks! // FrankB 19:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Rick, I didn't know the dot com had the earlier titles. Thanks // FrankB 21:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Which raises another issue... ownership relationship of grantvillegazette.com to Baen and EricFlint Enterprises. I know Baen had contracted for the first ten... then what happened? Eric even disappeared from the Baen Website there for a while—around three months or so, iirc. I know I emailed him on that. Maybe even twice.

• Would probably be best if you just updated The Grantville Gazettes main article with any and all "fixes" since you're integral involved behind the scenes and can keep the guessing down to a minimum. Did you proof that part of Baen Books (edit talk links history) on that aspect? ... Looks like you either blessed it, or ignored it! <G>

Your:

“ Baen's Bar is the only submission mechanisms for submitting stories to two professional SF Magazines. All stories submitted to the Grantville Gazette must be submitted through the 1632 Slush conference on the Bar, and all stories submitted for the "introducing" slots in Jim Baen's Universe must be submitted through the Universe Slush conference. ”

would indicate Baen's still has a significant monetary interest. [Good add, btw, Kudos!]

Thanks. One of us, or some other barfly like Piotr (possibly Wwoods?) ought to add some other authors with forums on the bar sidebar, I'd think... The other "key-ish" issue that needs some thinking and a way of settling for future updates is who is actually a Baen Author... see the list I tacked into talk:Jim Baen on that... which is off webwrights.

Is webrights a subsidiary (as I infer, or an independent entity, which would contradict one or both articles)? In any event, anyone with "real knowledge" vice my guesses would be and should be watching this kind of thing. I've certainly some serious reservations about claiming departed authors, such as RAH to take one glaring example, as a Baen author on that list if the relationship with webwrights is distant at best. Prior content and the Baen bio article represent webwrights as Jim Baen's, or Baen Books', so I see no reason to change that, unless you know otherwise. In any event, AT LEAST! I AIM to get stubs together for the first ten gazettes sometime today! Thanks! // FrankB 21:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes Lots!!! Though I've seen something by Eric about the ten GG's and a 'contract' with Baen... or may have been a 'subsequent' handshake understanding... and I can't check the email records till the construction crew gives me a clean environment and I get back to my main machine. OTOH, that's NBD. The big news is Webscriptions is essentially independent, albeit in close association with Baen's, and that will keep the mistakes to a minimum. What people challenge otherwise depends on whether it seems questionable or such. If I had to worry about cites for everything I know, I'd never get anything added to much of anything. I got GG05 up today, but got side-tracked a bit doing up TOC templates. The current "section titles" and general look/see/feel are under revision while I've got GG04's hood up and done except for the save. Thanks // FrankB 05:19, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Another need2

Have you got a definitive date on when Baen's Bar began operation? // FrankB 19:51, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

GREAT ANSWER... vry mch appreciated! // FrankB 19:08, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

think read slow

re: You realize that prior to 1997, Baen's bar existed as a topic area inside Jerry Pournelle's forums on BIX right? Bix was shut down in 2001, but was effectivly dead by the time the bar opened in '97. brief history here

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byte_Information_Exchange

...

No, I was a hardware guru in that era and really didn't browse the web until getting a AOL account in the early ninties (?late eighties???), and that channeled me, obviously. My Kids came along too (90 + 91). On computers, I tended to be writing stuff in C, or for Grad school needs (late eighties). By the late eighties I'd decided sturgeon's law pretty much applied to most "News", and it wasn't worth my time. ("Thanks school!") I stopped watching TV news and such, most TV, and am still informationally speaking, "withdrawn", even today. Shrug. Let's me have time to read things I enjoy, and do whatever ... time is precious.

By the time I dropped AOL, my eyes were changing and working more on computers all day, I really didn't need more eyestrain. That really applies to the days I visited the bar. The email interface killed me, and the newsreader I got ... well, I don't think I ever did figure out how to post with it. I'd too much on my plate otherwise, as we ended up moving up here... which meant I was doing a whole lot of construction to prep first a planned expansion of our old place, wasting 15 months with an archetect and builders only to find what we wanted to do was too costly and ... so then had to move. Also, little league and soccer coaching, boy scouts, etc. were big time sinks.

I only found Eric because I found 1633 in paperback... and visited the bar shortly after that. I was smart enough (sic) to pick up 1632 the same day, though! <G> I can probably blame 1632 for finding wikipedia as well... all the place and people mentions... soon after I had to scratch itches and fix things which I knew were incomplete or wrong, or out of context (all the youngsters here lack perspective, mostly), and so forth. Eventually I signed in, and... well, can't keep away very well, at least not until I get 1632 stuff up to grade. I used to waste time on the sister sites too, but now tend to avoid all but the commons.

Note btw, the reformatting I did to your drop. {{i}}, {{1}} and {{2}}/{{i2}} and {{i5}} all help in such situations. Thanks again, cheers! ttfn! // FrankB 19:41, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bahai how tehran.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Bahai how tehran.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia 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 non-free media 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. — Save_Us_229 09:01, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Slushpile WTH!

Just sampling the slushpile and found SILVER AGE... http://bar.baen.com/baen.1632Slush/69/SILVER-AGE.html, what the heck are all the formatting codes that aren't translating to HTML/unicode, or whatever? Firefox is displaying little diamonds with question marks, for example, at either end of "Missy, can you come over here?"... and all over the place otherwise. Looks like at the beginning and end of each phrase/sentence. Querp! // FrankB 22:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Got it... Blame Virginia! <g> Thanks! // 04:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fabartus (talk • contribs)

GG errata

re: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1632_writers&diff=182610188&oldid=182573890, your pages missing GG03 references/credits. // FrankB 22:16, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bahai how tehran.jpg

Being quite frank, the sarcasm used on the fair use rationale and the point for point checklist of each thing a fair use rationale needs, was inappropriate. A simple rationale like every other image is all that was needed. — Save_Us † 04:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Dated, and then some

Ahem: http://www.ericflint.net/index.php/2007/01/17/225/#more-225

• T'would be far more rewarding to check those pages were there a better degree of regular news updating. I care pfiffle about snippets, being minded such that I can't eat but one potato chip either, so avoid until the gestalt is out... but would be nice to know what's in the pipeline!

• Be well... I've pretty much (at least for now) withdrawn my support for this community over 1632 Editorial Board. Fiction notability, and all that is a bit too much to bear on top of a thankless task from the gitgo. When the deletionists can't see an article supporting tens of other articles is both wise and beyond convenient, well... no reason to go on wasting time adding if some idiot can slap a speedy delete on it without considering how such impacts other pages. Best! // FrankB 15:55, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:3dlogo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:3dlogo.gif. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --21:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: brown edits

Sorry, "npov" might not have been the best summary. The material claimed that the case was "the most famous", which had no reliable source, so anyone could have just said that. Also, that text said it was "undoubtedly the most famous" or something like that. Why undoubtedly? There are probably doubts out there, and again, there were no sources. The verifiability policy says that "Any material lacking a reliable source may be removed...", and while it says that "...editors may object if you remove material without giving them sufficient time to provide references", I think five years is more than enough.

I'd agree to putting it back, but only if a reliable source can be found. Green caterpillar (talk) 02:39, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:TopekaCityCrest.png

Thanks for uploading Image:TopekaCityCrest.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 17:36, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

File:Nps.gov logo.PNG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Nps.gov logo.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Skier Dude (talk) 04:56, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Bahai_how_tehran.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Bahai_how_tehran.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:33, 11 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:33, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Briggs v. Elliott

If you are still interested in the Clarendon County, S.C. schools suit which was the first of the desegregation cases to reach the Supreme Court as part of the Brown cases, try Richard Kluger's Simple Justice. It was a bestseller when it came out in '75 and is still regarded as the definitive history of the movement to end legal school segregation. It has an extensive exposition of the facts and background of Briggs. Any decent local library will have a copy, and it's still in print in paperback. ISBN 0394722558. Ellsworth (talk) 22:42, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Talk:1632 series

I hope your recent post indicates an interest in getting more actively involved here again, although not at the expense of your professional work. I'm an admin here; if you'd like to discuss the issue more, you can drop me a note: I'm still orangemike at-sign gmail dot com. Really, though, the substantive discussion does need to take place on the articles' talk pages. (All the 1632 articles have a tendency to be edited by fans like myself, as is true of a lot of pop culture topics. That does not constitute a waiver of the social contract we agree to when we edit Wikipedia.) --Orange Mike | Talk 18:24, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Echoing what I said in December. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:57, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 7 February

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Keypad page, your edit caused a duplicate page number error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Rboatright. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page.

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Rboatright. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Rboatright. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Rboatright. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:NPS.Gov

Template:NPS.Gov has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 16:11, 23 January 2023 (UTC)