User talk:Shyam/Archive7
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Shyam. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Shyam, please take a look at the section under discussion. I have added some useful matter with citations. Thanks.Dineshkannambadi 02:23, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your support!
|
A week ago I nominated myself, hoping to be able to help Wikipedia as an administrator as much as a WikiGnome. I am very glad many others shared my thoughts, including you. Thank you for your trust! Be sure I will use these tools to protect and prevent and not to harass or punish. Should you feel I am overreacting, pat me so that I can correct myself. Thanks again! ReyBrujo 23:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC) |
Signpost updated for November 20th.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 47 | 20 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
A request
Hi. I wonder if you could help me keep an eye on Lalu Prasad Yadav, Nitish Kumar, Ram Vilas Paswan, Jagannath Mishra, and a few other articles. A look at the history will demonstrate that there is a particular user and IP who are adding a few similar unsourced details in each of those articles. Thanks! Hornplease 08:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Of course. I have made a few prelimnary changes, and we can consider what else needs to be done later. Thanks for your time, and the best of luck! Hornplease 08:39, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 27th.
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 48 | 27 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 01:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Unspecified source for Image:Ambareesh.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Ambareesh.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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 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 you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. cohesion 06:59, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hello Cohesion, thanks for your message. But it would beeter if you go through history before tagging no source for old uploaded images, like Image:Ambareesh.jpg. Because some anon-vandals could have removed the source and tag. Regards, Shyam (T/C) 08:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yes that batch was much older than I had realized, sorry about that :) - cohesion 17:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
WikiProject India Newsletter: Volume I, Issue 3 - December 2006
|
|
|
Signpost updated for December 4th.
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 49 | 4 December 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Your input is requested
Your input would be appreciated at this Request for Comments. Kelly Martin (talk) 17:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Anna Wintour
I was going to ask you why you removed the Anna Wintour image and deleted it until I checked the Commons deletion log. It seems the admin there didn't read the Flickr page carefully enough ... the photographer, at my request, changed the image to CC-BY 2.5 (look beneath the picture; I don't know why the side tags haven't changed) to make it Wikimedia-friendly.
I have reuploaded it and taken the liberty of restoring it to the articles in question. Daniel Case 17:26, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- The original Flickr page, with the change in licensing indicated in the red-bordered area
- Does this explain things? I have an email from the photographer confirming this. I don't know how you can't see this.
- I also have an email from the photographer confirming this. What more do you want? Daniel Case 21:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- Not a problem. I assume I can reupload it?
- Yes, you may delete the screenshot, now that it has served its purpose. Daniel Case 01:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Gallery
Why are you editing my gallery to add images that I didn't create? — Omegatron 19:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for deleting Image:Reef2063.jpg. :) However, I noticed you didn't add back the categories and such that used to be on the page. Could you re-add the information, please? Thank you. :) --Kjoonlee 08:53, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Image:USA-satellite.jpg
I added {{NowCommonsThis}} to Image:USA-satellite.jpg, and you reverted my edit. Why did you do this? Edward 10:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- You're right of course, I should've checked commons and noticed the image has gone, but equally when you removed the {{NowCommonsThis}} you could've explained the situation in the edit summary. Edward 10:59, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Your removal of Chinese surname categories
Hello, you seem to be removing Chinese surname categories from the Wikipedia pages for Chinese individuals with those surnames. However, if you had been following the strongly contested discussion about the proposed deletion, you would have noticed that many editors maintained that if the categories were deleted, the names absolutely need to be added in the lists within each surname article. Thus, your contribution (deletion of the categories from articles) is unhelpful or worse, as I don't see that you consequently added the names in the lists within the surname articles. I respectfully request that you go back and do this, for each article for which you've removed the family name category. Thank you. Badagnani 10:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for this, in this case the admittedly slower but more "human" way of treating data as opposed to the massively quick and "efficient" way is the superior one, and less wasteful of bandwidth (and also preserving of content that, if eliminated, would represent a big loss for our encyclopedia). Badagnani 11:08, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Oh, now I see that you are the editor who made the decision to delete the categories, in the face of the fact that there really was no consensus developed in the discussion, with many editors giving well reasoned comments on both sides. As it seems that a compromise had nearly been developed, I don't believe the decision to simply "delete" because a few more editors voted "delete" than not (many of the "delete" voters apparently being regular "no" voters on the page, and having not given any reasoning behind their votes), and thus your decision does not really reflect the results of the discussion. In fact, from your actions it seems clear that you hadn't really been following it closely. In this light, I must ask strongly that this decision be reversed pending a true compromise being reached. That is what we are about here at Wikipedia and this particularly category, I believe, was not at all a frivolous one, but one that is of crucial importance to the study of East Asian culture. Badagnani 11:19, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Permission
Hi Shyam. I know I've said this before, but we can not interpret images with statements like Image:TAC SR6500 ~ Concert Audio Console.jpg's as GFDL. Only the copyright holder can license an image, and the GFDL is not the same thing as giving permission for use on Wikipedia. We have WP:CSD#I3 for these cases. When you were nominated for administrator, I did not oppose you because it had been several months since you had worked on images, and because I got the impression from our discussion that you were going to take the time to study the issues. I'd also like to remind you to clarify and correct the status of your uploads from your early days on Wikipedia; what I gave you before were just examples of the problems. If you're going to work in images, proceed with caution and don't hesitate to ask help. ×Meegs 18:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- I hate to be critical, but these issues are extremely important. Thanks for your positive response. I've replied to your message on my talk page. Please let me know if you even have questions. ×Meegs 19:17, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Would you please reconsider your closing of this CFD nom? Since it had zero objections, and CFD is not in the habit of rubber-stamping nominations to reach some kind of quorum, I don't quite see how this results in "no consensus". Yours, (Radiant) 13:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you. (Radiant) 14:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Image:Furtado02.jpg
You recently removed the replaceable tag from this image without providing any evidence that it would be impossible to create a freely-licensed image to depict Furtado. Please be more careful when removing tags from images; it is important to resolve the underlying problem first. --Yamla 16:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
CfD questions
A couple questions : ) - jc37 18:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 November 19#Category:Computer-related remakes
- Did you read/understand my concern? Plus by doing the merge, the category now needs to be renamed : (
- Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 November 19#Category:Mental-skill games and Category:Physical-skill games
- "Skill" was to be singular. The plural question by Radiant was about "Games" (which I fixed). Though I suppose that this could be speedy renamed.
- Jc37, sorry for the misconception Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 November 19#Category:Mental-skill games and Category:Physical-skill_games. These two should be speedy renamed. For Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 November 19#Category:Computer-related remakes, I am not sure for your comments. Is there any problem with present category? Shyam (T/C) 19:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, to clarify, There are two separate concepts being categorised together here: Films, and CVGs. They shouldn't be categorised together (and both were already subcategorised elsewhere). What I was suggesting is that we delete Category:Remakes, and keep Category:Computer-related remakes (though it probably needed a rename to Category:Computer and video game remakes, anyway). Hope that clarifies. I'll keep watching this page in case yo uwould like further clarification : ) - jc37 19:34, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Should these categories go for further discussions? Shyam (T/C) 19:42, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- If you're asking if it should be relisted, that would be fine with me. The problem, of course, is that the merge has already taken place, so the category in question has already been deleted. What do you suggest? - jc37 19:45, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- I think, it could be done manually without discussions, as discussions already had been done related to that and there was no such good response earlier. If you could take the responsibility of splitting accordingly, it would be appericiable, else I am ready to do it. Regards, Shyam (T/C) 19:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I do think a rename discussion should probably be listed on CfD. However, if we don't do a rename, I think I agree. I'll be happy to do the split. Would you undelete Category:Computer-related remakes? - jc37 20:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- If you think that the discussions is required before renaming then you could list. It could be good thing because we are going to split the categories into two. It would be a fresh discussion because there was no discussion earlier about splitting rather than merging. I have undeleted the category on your notice. Regards, Shyam (T/C) 20:13, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, then I'll repopulate the category, as it was before deletion (essentially undoing the merge), then list Category:Remakes for deletion. (Which is what I believe we're discussing.) Thank you for your help and insight in this : ) - jc37 20:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, finished the above. - jc37 20:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, then I'll repopulate the category, as it was before deletion (essentially undoing the merge), then list Category:Remakes for deletion. (Which is what I believe we're discussing.) Thank you for your help and insight in this : ) - jc37 20:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- If you think that the discussions is required before renaming then you could list. It could be good thing because we are going to split the categories into two. It would be a fresh discussion because there was no discussion earlier about splitting rather than merging. I have undeleted the category on your notice. Regards, Shyam (T/C) 20:13, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I do think a rename discussion should probably be listed on CfD. However, if we don't do a rename, I think I agree. I'll be happy to do the split. Would you undelete Category:Computer-related remakes? - jc37 20:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- I think, it could be done manually without discussions, as discussions already had been done related to that and there was no such good response earlier. If you could take the responsibility of splitting accordingly, it would be appericiable, else I am ready to do it. Regards, Shyam (T/C) 19:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
WP:FU
It's come to my attention that you may not be aware of recent changes to how WP:FU is enforced. We (that is, Wikipedia) used to let slide the use of fair-use images to depict subjects which still exist. This is no longer the case. This specifically means we are no longer permitted to, for example, use a fair-use image to depict a living person. Images in violation of this are said to be "replaceable". There's been some debate on this policy; for example, there was a movement, defeated, to allow the use of replaceable images if no freely-licensed images were currently available. Similarly, there have been some RfCs on this issue. The situation as it stands now, though, is that we are still not permitted to use fair-use images to depict living people (or objects, if the objects could still be photographed). See WP:FU, policy point 1 and counterexample 8 specifically. Images which violate this should be marked with {{subst:rfu}} and then deleted after seven days. Please contact me if this isn't clear to you. I can also go into a bit more detail if you wish. Thanks, and happy editing! --Yamla 01:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 11th.
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 50 | 11 December 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Image tagging for Image:Falgun_Mela.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Falgun_Mela.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi... I was just curious why this governor image was marked "keep" when the others were deleted. Is there a distinction with this one I'm missing? Drop me a line when you have a minute. Thanks...—Chowbok ☠ 17:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hmm... can I still dispute this on the image talk page, or is the decision final? I don't think he's made much of a case that it's irreplaceable. —Chowbok ☠ 15:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Administration and images
Hello Shyam. I'm really sorry to say this, but I need to be blunt because you have not taken the hint from our previous discussions. Copyright and Wikipedia's image policies are very complicated, and there is a lot that you do not understand, including basic concepts such as which works are subject to copyright and what it means for an owner to license their work. You've also been deleting images at an astounding rate, leaving no possibility that you are checking all of the things that need to be checked prior to deletion. You should not be using you admin powers to work with images. If you want, I will post to the administrator's noticeboard and request that others offer their opinions, but it is obvious to me that you are not, at least right now, qualified to work in this area. You're a good editor and the community showed a lot of faith in you during your RfA. I think it would be best, though, if you voluntarily chose to work in other areas, at least in your capacity as an administrator. ×Meegs 18:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Image:Akayev.jpg
hi. you've deleted the File:Akayev.jpg and referred to invalid fair-use claim. Since this image was uploaded before July 13, 2006, why did not you put a notice saying why you think the tag is invalid and wait for 7 days? -Ktotam 14:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- "You place {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} without explaining the reason for the same": the reasons were mentioned on the image description page. you did not comment upon them, but deleted the image referring to WP:CSD#I7, without mentioning why you believe the tag is invalid. for images with no fair-use rationale altogether (which this one wasn't), there exists WP:CSD#I6. -Ktotam 23:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Portal tips
I have done a lot of extensive work (and so has Rfrisbie) to Portal:Business and Economics. I would like to bring it to Featured Portal status and I am seeking your opinion! Please leave your suggestions at the the Portal talk:Business and Economics about how to get this portal to featured status. Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks! Nishkid64 04:40, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Image tagging for Image:Khatushyamji.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Khatushyamji.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:47, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Portal review volunteers
Hi, based on your previous good deeds, please consider becoming one of the portal review volunteers and adding your name to the list. :-) Regards, Rfrisbietalk 18:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Image:Chubarov.gif
I have to say, I forgot about this image. I uploaded it around the time I first started out at Wikipedia, and was not completely sure of the rules and regulations. As I can see now, it fails all basic standards for images. So it's probably best to have it removed, as it is copyrighted. Kaiser matias 05:21, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Image tagging for Image:Nishan_Pad_Yatra.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Nishan_Pad_Yatra.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:50, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Just a heads up
You deleted Image:ToCatchAPredatorNew.jpg a few days ago for lack of fair use rationale; I've since restored the file and added my own rationale to it. I hope that is acceptable. Thanks. theProject 18:32, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 18th.
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 51 | 18 December 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:25, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Image tagging for Image:Teen_Baan.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Teen_Baan.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:31, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Image:PMRC1.jpg
Can you restore this file please. It was a photograph by a member of the US government and is public domain by definition. Thanks. --*Spark* 01:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hello Spark, I could restore the image. But the website has their own copyrights, so it does not seem to me in public domain. Shyam (T/C) 10:06, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
- No longer a problem, I'm investigating other sources. Thanks. --*Spark* 10:23, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Regarding your comments
See Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Business and Economics. I wasn't sure if you knew this, but the stock market indices are automatically updated by DinojermBot at 21:20 UTC every day from Yahoo! Finance. Also, the topics are general, so things from Fortune 500 or other magazines would not seem fitting in this section (at least I think so). Anyway, I just wanted to let you know. =) Nishkid64 20:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
- My response to your question: "I personally don't think it is wise to update the bot more than once a day. The markets are around the world, and they close at different times. So, if I decided to run the bot at 14:00 UTC, I would get the final Asian markets, but the realtime quotes for the American markets. By doing it at exactly 21:20, I can guarantee that the bot will have that specific day's final stock market results at around this time. If I update later, the Asian markets are already open for the next day and Yahoo Finance will clear the market info. It just seems better to do it once, and not have to worry about any potential problems." By the way, DinojermBot is my friend's bot, and he programs it to specifically update at 21:20, which is 4:20 PM EST for me. We're Hitchhiker's Guide freaks :-P. Nishkid64 23:51, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Portal:Asia
I've responded to your comments on Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Asia/archive1.--TBCΦtalk? 04:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
- Has your objection been remedied? I would very much like to close Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Asia/archive1.--cj | talk 23:37, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
- I believe all of your actionable objections have been addressed (that is, objections made on the basis of criteria), and that the remainder of your comments are suggestions which could be pursured outside of Porta:Asia's candidacy. If you have any further comments to make or clarifications to those existing, I ask that you do so soon. As I said, I am eager to close this, both because I have left it open longer than I would usually prefer and that I no longer see any cause to keep it open. Thanks muchly, --cj | talk 14:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Regarding the removal of orphan tags on Philipino seals
Actualy those images are aparently not in the public domain. The "Philipino givernment work" tag says only non-commercial use is allowed, so the only way they could be used on Wikipedia would be as "fair use". --Sherool (talk) 15:43, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks Sherool for telling that. The tag is really very confusing. I am going to delete all those images. Shyam (T/C) 18:36, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Mediation Cabal: IRA "Volunteers"
Hi - thanks for taking up this case. Please see my response to your initial comment here: [1] Bastun 11:37, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
Seraphimblade's RfA
Thanks for your comments in my recent RfA, which failed. If you have any further advice it would be quite welcome! Seraphimblade 15:04, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-12-02 IRA 'Volunteer' usage
Why did you change you decision on the basis of Batsuns misinformed comment? What planet are you on - can you explain how you consdier it POV - it is not and this has been proven and concensus. Have you even read any of this? Provisional_Irish_Republican_Army Vintagekits 18:00, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
Admin coaching
Hi Shyam! You left a message on my talkpage regarding admin coaching. I went ahead and created a subpage where you suggested, so I'm reporting back. How do you want to go about this? Do I ask a series of questions, and then have you answer them? Or do you begin with the questions? The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 02:23, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 26th.
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 52 | 26 December 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:29, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
My Request for Adminship
Thanks for your support on my successful Request for Adminship (final result 78 Support /0 Oppose / 1 Neutral) I have now been entrusted with the mop, bucket and keys. I will be slowly acclimating myself to my new tools over the next months. I am humbled by your kind support and would certainly welcome any feedback on my actions. Please do not hesitate to contact me. Once again, many thanks and happy new year! All the best, Asteriontalk 16:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Portal:Religion
Hi, Shyam. We're starting to clean up Portal:Religion. Are you interested in helping out? At the very least, please start adding your tips at the talk page on what would be needed to bring it up to featured status. Cheers! Rfrisbietalk 23:38, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Portals
I noticed that it is only recently that you have started reviewing featured portals. With my greatest respect, I'm finding that some of your objections could be avoided with a little more indepth reviewing of the dynamics and programming of the portal before making them. Also further inspection of other featured portals will give you better understanding of what and what does not merrit an objection. My immediate example would be the use of bolding. On your exploring of other featured portals, you will see that their layouts, colours, styles, and even bolding of what greatly varies. Its a creative artistic right rather than a technical problem that conflicts with policy, and not usually something that would be reasoning for an objective. Those are personal choices and its best for the reviews that personal opinion is excluded for a NPOV on the subject. The simple question is that is the portal worthy of Wikipedia's best work, rather than does it meet with your personal stylistic preferences. I noticed similar comments on the other portal candidates which is why I bring this up. Please don't take this personally, and I do sincerely mean it in the most respectful manor. If you have further questions, feel free to write me back. Mkdwtalk 10:20, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
While checking my watchlist this morning
I can across an edit by you that i don't understand and I'm hoping that you can enlighten me. It was at -Image:WWStoryRome.jpg- and you added something about there being another image at wikicommons (or someplace) with the same name. What does this mean? I have posted a lot of pictures in wikipedia and someone suggested that I place them in wikicommons, but I can not figure out exactly what that means or how to do it. Perhaps you can assist me or at least let me know what this is all about. thanks, Carptrash 16:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
Hey, Shyam! Check out the new Wikipedia:Portal peer review! You may want to request a portal to be reviewed or review some portals there! —sd31415 (sign here) 17:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
Vandalism in cs. language here on en.wiki
Please block this user: User:Hrdý čůrák His name and his edits are vandalising parodies of one cs. user. He is using very nasty czech language, that cannot be tolerated. Thanks. --Aktron 21:17, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Image:SuperCollider icon cube bw.png
Hi Shyam - thanks for the message re the orphaned SuperCollider icon. Please see comments here: Image talk:SuperCollider icon cube bw.png --mcld 16:38, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Typography image edits
Hello Shyam. Just noticed your edits in typography, Thanks. I am now visiting your country for the furst time! Fantastic and lovely. Best, Jim CApitol3 04:05, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
portal:indian independence movement.
Hey shyam, do me favour friend. please move the subpages to the portal. Thanks Sushant gupta 06:06, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Shyam, please do not delete anymore fotos I upload to the Wiki. Because, I own all the fotos I am posting and the person happens to be my father whom I lost some months ago who is an important composer for Turkish Republic. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Otavilog (talk • contribs)
Thanks
Thank you for letting me know about the uploading images rules however, I have own all the copyright information to all the images I upload. I dont believe I violated any rules (in the links) you have sent me. But, I will be more carefull and try to obey the wikipedias's rules. Thank you for the information. Have a great new year. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Otavilog (talk • contribs) 06:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC).