Cannabis Ruderalis

Content deleted Content added
Please delete
No edit summary
Line 637: Line 637:


:Please delete - [[User:Arpingstone|Adrian Pingstone]] 18:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:Please delete - [[User:Arpingstone|Adrian Pingstone]] 18:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

== Possibly unfree Image:CO777.PNG ==
<div style="padding:5px; background-color:#E1F1DE;"> An image that you uploaded or altered, [[:Image:CO777.PNG]], 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 [[:Image:CO777.PNG|page]] for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —[[User:Remember the dot|Remember the dot]] <sup>([[User talk:Remember the dot|talk]])</sup> 16:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC)<!-- Template:Idw-pui --></div>

Revision as of 16:50, 9 May 2007

Roof tiled in imitation of thatch photo

That is one fantastic roof in Croyde, North Devon. I want to build this type of roof on a cottage that I am designing right now. I want to get detailed photos of the underside of the curved part to see how it was constructed...any way you can get that and post it? Any details about the design and construction of the roof would be much appreciated.
ThatchFun

Imitation thatched roof at Croyde, north Devon, England.

.

I do have one more pic so here it is. It probably won't help! I was on holiday nearby and I can't go back to ask about the construction (it's 100 miles away from me). You could write to them, the address would be Welcome Cottage, Croyde, north Devon, England
You might be interested to know a bit more about messaging so here goes:
New messages go at the bottom of the page, not at the top where you put it. You could have linked to the article with two square brackets either side of the article's name, as I have done above with the articles name of Roof (notice that the link turns blue, a single click will then take anyone straight to the article where the pic is to be found). Sign your username and the date, if you have a username, with four tildes (the wiggly line thing). On my keyboard the tilde shares a key with the hash sign. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 08:28, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fig, you have a problem that some editors have which is the use of semi-specialised phraseology that you understand perfectly but millions won't in other countries or even here in Bristol where I live. They are NOT normal phrases with obvious meanings. Yes, they are understandable by you but that's not the point - John Bull in Ohio might want to understand it as well.

Your comment “If you dont know what an "evolved community" is I suggest you shouldn’t be editing small urban wiki stubs” is so silly. I have been editing WP since January 2003 (you have been editing since January 2006) so I DO have the experience and I will continue to edit any article that the reader may not understand or that shows poor style.

That it’s a “small urban wiki stub” has no relevance whatever, I edit long articles or stubs, on any subject, because unclear writing is recognizable no matter the subject.

It would be great if I did a poll of Wikipedians all around the world to see if they know what “evolved community” and “residentially fragmented” means but its too much effort since your mind seems to be closed and I never get into to-and-fro arguments, there’s too much else to do on WP. So revert by all means and I can take the article off my Watchlist so that I don’t have to see an article that many will find annoying. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 10:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for you message which I've passed on to User:SFC9394 who made the maps - it might be useful if you could contact them direct.— Rod talk 17:25, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:SFC9394 has now updated the map to show SCC & B&W as disused and the Dundas & Avoncliffe aqueducts as separate. You may need to refresh your cache but could you check these satisfy your comments. — Rod talk 19:15, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The 2 aqueducts are now fine but there could be a small refinement to the Somerset Coal Canal. The final 0.5 km of the SCC, up to the Dundas Aqueduct, still fully exists (as boat moorings) so should be coloured in the K&A blue. This stretch is so short that I would in no way object if it was ignored. The stretch runs from the Dundas Aqueduct back only as far as the "S" of the word "Dundas". It might be helpful to tell you that the stretch is 4 millimetres long on my 19 inch monitor, viewing the biggest version of the map - Adrian Pingstone 20:08, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Changes made - I had to update the map anyway to remove a plural from the key! SFC9394 20:37, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Adrian,

I've been trying to put an image of Chinese Tulip Tree on its WP page -- even got permission from China to upload an image of a stamp[1], but that's not good enough. Any image that you can provide would be welcome. An article on the Kew Gardens collection, complete with map, is here[2] - Tony 23:10, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I've no other pics of Kew, I went there on holiday and am now 100 miles away - Adrian Pingstone 19:03, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jaguar XJ 8

Dear Adrian,

I just have a question concerning your Jaguar XJ8. Can you please tell me what the colour denotation is? It looks like Sapphire Metallic Clearcoat 806/JGE or 1806/JHE. Thank you for replying ex ante. Jag Enthusiast Sava

Hi! It would be helpful to have told me which pic you refer to, I've had to spend a while just finding it. Just put the article name in double square brackets, this seems to be the article: Jaguar XJ, car R790 MFE. Sorry, I'm just a photographer who enjoys taking pics of transport, I know nothing of stuff like paint colours - Adrian Pingstone 19:01, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sloping?

As per your comment here, I was wondering what "sloping" meant in terms of that picture. thanks. Towsonu2003 19:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for your question. I don't think you can be aware that the sea shore is always level against the land, it can't be any other way (it doesn't depend on how the mountains might slope in the distance). I saw the slope of the seashore the instant I looked at the picture, this is a very common failing with seascapes. To check, I just pulled the pic upwards until the seashore was running along a horizontal part of the screen, then you'll see it. If you don't understand what I mean please ask again. - Adrian Pingstone 20:08, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I see... thanks :) Towsonu2003 20:21, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

Your image of the interior of Canary Wharf tube station has been selected as Selected picture in Portal:Tube. Unisouth 06:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Messier.all.750pix.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Messier.all.750pix.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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 its not being deleted. Thank you. Earle Martin [t/c] 12:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC) -- Earle Martin [t/c] 12:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Pic on Kazan Governorate - Thanks!

Thanks a million! It looks great. I'll have to examine what you did. Thanks! Mattisse(talk) 20:05, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip! Mattisse(talk) 21:16, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Upper Thracian Lowlands

Greetings, aerospacer and fellow geek! You voted against the featuring of the UTL picture on the (totally valid, sorry about that) grounds that it was too small. The author has uploaded a new version, and there's a lively vote going on about which version to use. You might like to take another look. --Kizor 21:27, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Use of Romanian language

Will you please stop writing lengthy chunks of your Talk Page here in your native language. This is the English Wikipedia so most of us have not the faintest idea what you are writing. It's discourteous to the majority of your readers - Adrian Pingstone 09:16, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Pingstone, why should I listen to you? When I needed you you didn't at least answered me. So? Are you racist against Romanians like all other English people? I will use my language as long as I can. :Regards,Arthur, 28 October 2006
Thank you for your sad reply. It is too offensive for me to bother to reply to. - Adrian Pingstone 19:55, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adrian!
I was wondering if you could specify your prefence (b/w the two versions) on the dragonfly compound eye FPC nom? Thanks, --Fir0002 08:05, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done, regards - Adrian Pingstone 08:52, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lustleigh

Thank you! I tried a little while ago - you may find some resistance! All the best --Herby talk thyme 18:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:M13.arp.750pix.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:M13.arp.750pix.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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 its not being deleted. Thank you. Peter O. (Talk) 12:09, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Messier.all.750pix.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Messier.all.750pix.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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 its not being deleted. Thank you. Peter O. (Talk) 12:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Image:A380.emirates.736pix.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:A380.emirates.736pix.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) 16:00, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright

Hi Adrian,
How's it going? Please have a look at the page Air Algerie. There are lots of copyright violating images taken from airliners.net. Thanks a lot, Jaw101ie 23:02, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The vandal seems to be Amine2. Other editors, has well as myself, have removed his copyright violations so all's well at the moment. However, this person has since attempted to put the pics back on but we'll be watching! Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 14:39, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was in Park Street today and got a decent pic of the Naked Man, as you requested some weeks ago. I've put on two pics, a close up and a longshot to show the surroundings. Thanks for alerting me to the need for this photo - Adrian Pingstone 19:29, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Adrian, that's just what I was looking for. I thought I had found a Banksy stencil near Brick Lane in London the other day, but User:Duncancumming reliably informed me it was actually known as Mr Yu.
As it happens I think you already managed to catch another Banksy on the side of The Thekla, so now that you've got your eye in you might notice some more similar graffiti around Bristol.... -- Solipsist 00:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the skeleton rowing was Banksy but I wasn't sure so didn't put it in the article. Now that you say it is him, I've added it to Banksy. I'm not aware of any more of his work in Bristol. Cheers - Adrian Pingstone 10:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
At first I thought you had uploaded a crop of the original Thelka image, but looking at the image description page, I suspect that you've been out and taken a fresh shot today. Nice job!
I'd be surprised if there aren't more Bansky's around in Bristol - it would probably be worth talking to User:Duncancumming or others of WikiProject Graffiti. This Web site suggests there is one on Cheltenham Road and there is mention of one on Gloucester Rd here. However, I don't know how current these websites are, and graffiti can be transient. There are several websites and Flickr groups devoted to Banksy, so it can be rewarding to look through those and see if you can recognise any locations. If you happen to catch any, I'm not sure that the article would have room to support them, but there is a category for Banksy on Commons where I'm sure they would be appreciated. Cheers. -- Solipsist 21:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You've caught me out! I put the Naked Man's date (November 2006) on the Image Description Page of the Skeleton Rower in error (now corrected). The Rower closeup was in fact taken at the same time (April 2005) as I took the general shot of Thekla. I had spotted the graffiti on the side of the boat but was not sure what it was. So I took the telephoto shot to examine at leisure on my computer. I had no idea it was by Banksy. Thanks for the other possible locations - Adrian Pingstone 22:54, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A new section has been oppened in Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates to clarify the consensus on the picture Image:Twin lantana camara edit.jpg. Since your vote was given before Edit1 was published, would you please like to participate in the discussion? regards, - Alvesgaspar 11:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Local images

Thanks for the improved pic on Kennet and Avon Canal. Can I be cheeky and ask if you have any pics of: Tudor House, Langport, St Margaret's Almshouses (Taunton), Rook Lane Chapel (Frome) or Robin Hoods Hut, (Goathurst) to illustrate some articles I've been doing. Also I found an image for Temple of Harmony under creative commons but could you check I've not infringed any licences - see Image:Templofharmony.jpg. I know you have loads of pics of local scenes & wondered if you had any of these? — Rod talk 16:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for being kind about my improvements, I get nervous when I change a pic in case the other party doesn't think it is an improvement! Two sorries - first I know nothing about copyright etc because I put on only my own PD pics. Secondly I haven't gone as far from Bristol as the places you mention so no luck there. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 16:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Mig23.750pix.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Mig23.750pix.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. Odedee 23:43, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can I please have your permission to use your image Stwlan.dam.750pix.jpg‎ (110KB, MIME type: image/jpeg)for an educational website I'm creating? I work for the University of Reading and am writing a website for science students in the UK in general. Many thanks

Yes, of course. Use it, or alter it, in any way you wish. Best Wishes- Adrian Pingstone 12:52, 10 November 2006 (UTC

Poole

Hi, I was thinking about creating a gallery of Poole with some images of the main buildings of historic old poole and some other important local landmarks e.g. Barclays building/RNLI. Do you have any other images of Poole that you could contribute? LordHarris 13:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the suggestion Jaak Nijssen 17:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind comment. Galleries are very useful when the number of pictures is too great for the amount of text. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 17:49, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Tornado.gr4.750pix.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tornado.gr4.750pix.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}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

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. --Chowbok 19:46, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External Link Removal (Glacier)

Thanks for the apology and for clarifying your comments on my talk page.

Regarding the link to eoearth.org, You stated "it's useful and not spam because no price is given nor where to buy it". This, however, is not the criteria in the WP:EL standard. WP recently tightened their external link standards and actually elevated several criteria from "quideline" status to "policy". Sounds like semantical hair splitting, but from what I've read, WP is getting flooded with link spammers who are not simply trying to sell products but are trying to promote their own websitesWikipedia:WikiProject Spam. Here's an extract from this new policy statement;

"For policy or technical reasons, editors are restricted from linking to the following, without exception.
A website that you own, maintain or are acting as an agent for; even if the guidelines otherwise imply that it should be linked to. This is in line with the conflict of interests guidelines."

Further it states in its guidelines that the following links are to be avoided:

"Links that are added to promote a site..."

It appears that an individual or group of eoearth.org users have been flooding WP with links to promote this website. In most cases, the only contributions to WP by these users are the additon of these links. In the case of KonaScout (who added this link), this user was warned twice prior to cease link spamming eoearth.org by two other editors and the links were removed. If you check his contribution list, the vast majority are simply adding external eoearth.org links. Other eoearth.org users likewise have been warned by other editors and most have stopped.

My removal of this link was in accordance with the WP standard. If you still object to its removal and think that its retention should be treated as an exception, please discuss it in the Glacier article Talk page.

Thanks again for taking the time to write and explain your comments. I have not removed the link yet, but wanted to get your response first. Calltech 22:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your clear explanation, I now understand why the Link is undesirable, please remove it. I again apologise for the Edit Summary that is stuck there. I wish these Summaries could be edited but, understandably, they can't. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 08:57, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Adrian and good luck to you. Calltech 12:03, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image placing

Be careful when you move images, like in John Cabot. Your last move created unpleasant blank spaces... Ciao and good work! --Attilios 10:13, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ok. Strangely, the current version of the article looks goods also on my PC. I've same resolution than yours. I'm also glad that you put an eye to blank spaces and style: I get very nervous when editors here put things casually here and there... Thanks and good work! --Attilios 11:37, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barton-le-Clay

Hey Arpingstone, I've noted your recent work on Barton-le-Clay and it is much appreciated. However, you gave an offensive edit summary to one of your copyedits. I agree that these were major mistakes, but per WP:COPYEDIT, such edit summaries might be offensive to the original author of the text. Thank you. Michaelas10 (Talk) 10:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment. I am a mild, gentle, person but sometimes I "flip". I found this edit so careless that I was not inclined to be gentle in my Edit Summary.
The person wrote (I have put the three errors in bold):
………and Barton Players, the local ameture dramatics group, regually hold plays and Summer Workships for children in the village hall.
My Edit Summary said:
Congratulations! Three spelling mistakes in one sentence!
Such a sarcastic Edit Summary is very rare for me but, on this occasion, I neither regret it nor apologise for it. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 14:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, no big deal. Everyone make mistakes sometimes. Please do not consider the messege above as a "warning", just a good faith note. Michaelas10 (Talk) 15:22, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your kind message of 15.22. As I said, that kind of Edit Summary from me is very very rare. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 15:48, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also, please take more care when editing articles. On this article you have made a couple of basic mistakes. Just a note. Lcarsdata 08:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately, without examples of my “basic mistakes”, I cannot defend myself. I think it sad that you have criticised a fellow Wikipedian, yet have not said what the criticism is. (You should know that I have done 16,000 edits since January 2003 and this is the first complaint of “mistakes”.) If the mistakes were minor then it would be normal to correct them yourself, there is no need to let the other party (me) know that they have made a mistake.
Although I don’t know what I’m supposed to have done, I find it weird to be "told off" for my editing skills by someone whose own editing skills ended us up with an entry for Barton-le-Clay that was so massively unencyclopedic that I had to do hundreds of changes to bring it into line with the WP norm for village entries. (An aside: the reader of this might like to look at the Barton-le-Clay entry for 12.32 on 22nd October 2006 to see the state it was in when I came across it). Had you looked at a few other village entries on WP you would have seen how far off your entry was from the norm, and I would not have needed to edit it at all - Adrian Pingstone 14:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I orphaned Image:Gripen.750pix.jpg per WP:FUC. Sincerely, --Oden 15:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that's fine - Adrian Pingstone 16:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External link removed

Hello, I noticed you removed an external link because the page was in a foreign language (diff). This is not an excluding factor (for instance many governments in non-english speaking countries have websites in a foreign language). Instead you can clear up any unnecessary links (regardless of language) by referring to WP:EL or WP:SPAM, just write "removing linkspam" in the edit summary. Keep up the good work! --Oden 15:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your message. I’ve been editing WP every day since January 2003 so I like to think I know what I’m doing. As you probably agree, the aircraft spotting page in German was not acceptable to WP so I removed it. I always write a helpful Edit Summary so I wrote This is the English Wikipedia, foreign language links are not allowed so German language link removed. I did not say that certain foreign language links are OK but perhaps I should have.
So, in future, I’ll change the wording to say This is the English Wikipedia, foreign language links are not normally allowed so German language link removed.
I never write Removing link spam because that gives the uploader no information about why his/her link was unacceptable. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 16:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for correcting my misunderstanding, and for your contributions. Keep up the good work! Sincerely, --Oden 07:09, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arp, you say {Unencyclopedic sentence removed again, how can the reader have any idea what "residentially fragmented" and "evolved community" mean.} on editing Cabot. I dont understand what your problem is with this - they are entirely normal phrases with obvious meanings. The residential areas in Cabot are divided into 6 seperate areas, none of which is identifiably "Cabot". If you dont know what an "evolved community" is I suggest you shouldnt be editing small urban wiki stubs. Contrast with the "Clifton" page. Please justify its removal, come up with alternative text, or I will re-insert it. The information is justifably encyclopedic and needs to be included. Fig 23:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fig, you have a problem that some editors have which is the use of semi-specialised phraseology that you understand perfectly but millions won't in other countries or even here in Bristol where I live. They are not normal phrases with obvious meanings. Yes, they are understandable by you but that's not the point - John Bull in Ohio might want to understand it as well.
Your comment “If you dont know what an "evolved community" is I suggest you shouldn’t be editing small urban wiki stubs” is silly. I have been editing WP since January 2003 (you have been editing since January 2006) so I do have the experience and I will continue to edit any article that the reader may not understand or that shows poor style.
That it’s a “small urban wiki stub” has no relevance whatever, I edit long articles or stubs, on any subject, because unclear writing is recognizable no matter the subject.
Revert by all means and I can take the article off my Watchlist so that I don’t have to see an article that many will find annoying (and I still don't know what evolved community means!!). Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 10:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Come up with some better text then. As I said, the information is relevant and I think the meaning clear. If you dont, then improve the text; but dont just delete it - that's just silly. It's ridiculous to delete sound information from any encyclopaedia just because you think it wont be understood - it is better to have extra information that some people might understand and others not than it is not to have the information at all. Heck, the people who dont understand it might try and find out what it means...and get smarter in the process. Everyone's a winner. If you have better text, put it in, or I will re-insert. Fig 13:26, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply. You seem unable to tell me what "evolved community" means although I directly asked you to tell me. Maybe you don't know either! Incidentally, why should the reader find what the phrases mean, they surely expect WP to be their one source.
I can't do a statistically valid poll but I asked my wife, younger son (Degree in Economics and Marketing from UWE) and older son (Degree in Politics, University of Essex), and none new the meanings.
Finally, it's not sensible to ask me to re-edit those phrases, for very obvious reasons. I am happy for you to revert. There seems no point in carrying this discussion any further so cheers from Adrian Pingstone 15:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Luminarium

Hello. You may be interested in another Luminarium-related discussion here. Regards, El_C 15:35, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, very interesting - Adrian Pingstone 16:27, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Aerial london 2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Aerial london 2.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 16:05, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

License tagging for Image:CO777.png

Thanks for uploading Image:CO777.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 16:06, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Your message is not relevant to me, I merely re-uploaded it, having lightened it in photoshop - Adrian Pingstone 16:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About TAROM photo (chance to explain)

Hello, Arpingstone. My intention is not to replace your photos with mine. Actually, I added one of your pictures in the Tarom article (the one with the B777). I thought just that there are too many Boeing 737 pictures in the article, while the Tarom fleet consists of other aircraft too. That is why I uploaded the photo with the A318 from Romanian Wikipedia, so I had to sacrifice one of the 737 pictures; since there were two made in Heathrow, I decided to delete one; Anyway, the best thing is to create a link to Wikipedia Commons, where we can put all the pictures. Thanks. Cristibur 21:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your friendly response. Have you made a mistake above (or have I misunderstood?) because Tarom don't have any B777!
I understand the points you make but since Tarom have 2 A310s, 2 A318s, and 9 B737s an emphasis on B737 pics seems reasonable. Anyhow, if you would be kind enough to let my pic stay that would be great (and the article is not yet overcrowded with pics so I don't think we need not send our readers to Commons). Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 23:05, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I added the pic where the Tarom B737 sits next to an United B777, I meant that pic. Greetings! Cristibur 23:51, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you do requests?

Hi. I've been seeing your pics in various articles I work on, and you seem to have quite a collection. I have a couple of new articles, and a few old ones, that are in desperate need of good pics. Is there any chance you might have some already, or be able to get some? I'll have to make a list if you're interested, either of the pics I could use, or of the articles themsleves (or both). What I need the most right now are a few of some civil Hughes/MD 500s, old and new models (I can be more specific). Thanks for listening. - BillCJ 01:48, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for writing. I have five Hughes/MD helicopter pics that I don't seem to have uploaded onto any article. They are two Hughes 500 Model 369HS (G-ORRR, built 1975, and G-GSPG, built 1976), a Hughes 500 Model 369D (G-BIOA, built 1980), an MD500N NOTAR (G-SMAC, built 1992) and an MD500E Model 369E (G-TRUE, built 1992). I can upload any (or all) to illustrate articles. The obvious articles are:
MD Helicopters
Hughes Helicopters
NOTAR
MD Helicopters MD 500
Shall I upload to those articles as I think fit or do you have some ideas? Best wishes - Adrian Pingstone 12:04, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that's great! If you don't mind, put them all on the MD Helicopters MD 500 page, and I'll spread them around as needed. I'd like to see them all in one place to see what I think of them. THis will help a lot, many thanks! - BillCJ 17:13, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and take your time; no deadlines on Wiki!! - BillCJ 18:23, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for the pics. I have added a list of needed pics on my Talk Page. If you can help, thanks, but enjoy the holidays first! I can wait. - BillCJ 17:59, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!


Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays Arpingstone! | AndonicO Talk | Sign Here 01:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
May you and your family have a Merry Christmas, as well as any other Holiday you may celebrate. I hope that warmth, good cheer, and love surround you during these special days. May God bless you during the Holidays. | AndonicO Talk | Sign Here 01:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply] File:Julekort.jpg
.

Algerian Aviation

Hello. I'd assume that you also were intelligent enough to extrapolate that the unregistered user with the IP address of 200.122.86.50 (from Buenos Aires, Argentina) may be also the same editor with the handle of Velentine and Amine2. I don't know what the agenda of this person is, but please watch the articles that he haunts frequently. I'll continue to do the same. Putting a ati-vandalism block on the articles is desirable, but I don't have the authority to do so. Cheers. Elektrik Blue 82 21:23, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm aware that these three sad people are probably connected. I had a long battle with Anime over vandalism, a few months ago, until he seemed to have quit, and I agree that 200..... seems to be doing much the same "work" as Velentine. Heavens knows what satisfaction they find in their nonsense! Tomorrow I'll find how to request a Block on Velentine. If an Admin reads this, would they block Velentine for me, please (the story of his vandalism can be seen on the History for Air Algerie) - Adrian Pingstone 21:51, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried once to notify an Admin in order to block someone else (for a related but different topic) but it backfired and I also got a block for violating 3RR. **crunch** But I have already posted this on the talk page of WP:AIRPORTS hoping that other editors would watch the pages as well. Cheers. Elektrik Blue 82 21:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I read somewhere that reverting vandalism does not count towards 3RR so I have no worries on that account. - Adrian Pingstone 21:59, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha. I just read the policy on WP:VANDAL. I've reverted the other two articles back again. Elektrik Blue 82 22:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Photographer's Barnstar
With thanks for your photographic contributions, I give you another of this award. Timrollpickering 18:40, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you very much for helping fix my user page! Have a Happy New Year! Sue H. Ping 20:07, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is this actually an F/A-18? I'm pretty sure the Swiss use the F-18, which is an export version with ground attack capability removed. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 22:32, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. Have a look at this URL (it's the official Swiss AF site):
http://www.vbs-ddps.ch/internet/luftwaffe/en/home/about/assets/aircraft/fa18.html
I think it will show that I am correct. Perhaps the Swiss web site is wrong and needs updating? - Adrian Pingstone 22:45, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, looking at [3] the terms seem to get thrown around kind of sloppily, but they say "For the time being the F-18s are to be used exclusively for air-to-air combat.' I think the swiss call them F/A-18s, even though they have the same limitations as the F-18s. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 22:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The article on F/A-18 Hornet says: "Switzerland uses F-18C/D, later Swiss specific mid-life update. The Swiss F-18s were originally without ground attack capability until hardware was retrofitted." In any case, it's a great photo! --Oden 00:59, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Ba.concorde.g-boac.719pix.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Ba.concorde.g-boac.719pix.jpg. However, Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. MECUtalk 21:19, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and delete, no problem - Adrian Pingstone 22:20, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Air Algerie

I didn't add those tables in for the record. They were there already there, and I just edited them to look like the other tables. It seems to me that I believe the person who did add them took them directly from the website, which had much similar tables to how they looked originally. Try not to pre-judge situations, as you did.--Golich17 03:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if I gave you offence, but that Edit Summary in Air Algerie was not directed at you in any way. I was referring to whoever put the speculation into the article in the first place. Sorry, I should have been clearer! - Adrian Pingstone 10:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Airbus.a320family.750pix.jpg

Hello! I tagged Image:Airbus.a320family.750pix.jpg as replaceable, you might want to take another look at it and see if we still have any use for it. Cheers! --Oden 16:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also found several replacements on the commons for Image:Typhoon.750pix.jpg, which I have orphaned. I also noticed that you have uploaded many images, and since some of them are fair use images there is the probability that they are going to be replaced in the future. Every time someone replaces a fair use image they can notify the uploader, so if you don't want to receive a bunch of warning messages you could consider doing like Adam Carr has done on his talk page. Sincerely, Oden 17:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have no problem with your deleting any pic uploaded by me that isn't PD. In my early days of adding pics to WP I didn't understand the licencing rules and so made mistakes. Now I upload only pics off my own camera and declare them all PD. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 18:04, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FPC notes

Hi, can you take another look at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Zebra Botswana? Two edited versions have been created to address the contrast issue. Also, Michaelas10 has nominated Image:Peacock.detail.arp.750pix.jpg for delisting here. --KFP (talk | contribs) 17:44, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits

Hi Arpingstone. I see you do a lot of great work here on Wikipedia! While I want you to keep it up and to still be bold, I'd like to suggest that before you make massive edits to an article or remove a large chunk of information simply because you feel something looks wierd or out of place, you should discuss the change in that article's talk page. I'm not saying that you do this (make these edits) all the time, but it seems that you do this often, whether it be a chart you think should not be there or whether it be a paragraph you don't fully understand. Also, I think that wording like "one can do such a thing" is okay and doesn't have to be replaced by "such a thing can be done". It makes the article more dynamic and interesting than it would be with constantly subjective wording. Before you change all the wording in an article, I suggest that you discuss that change too. Thanks again for your contributions to Wikipedia! Althepal 20:50, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I noticed that at least once (The Adobe Photoshop article) you mistook an edit (which was a little messed up) for vandalism. I left your change as is, but just try to be a little more careful to see if what looks like vandalism might be an honest attempt to improve the article, but the person accidentally inserted the edit in the wrong place or something. Just something to keep in mind. Keep up the good work, Althepal 20:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)![reply]
Your comments would have been much easier to reply to if you had let me know the articles concerned (apart from Photoshop) so I have no comment except for the following general ones:
I've made 8,000 edits since January 2003, with only about 20 "complaints", so that's not bad. Inevitably some of my edits will be contentious so just revert what you don't like. If (say) 99% of my edits are good then I'm happy. This is a community encyclopedia and you are allowed to revert edits. - Adrian Pingstone 21:09, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Very true. ;) You generally do good work, so I'm happy too. Just informing you that some types of edits should be more carefully made. For example, you removed the table and some important facts from the Helicon Filter article and and the Adobe Photoshop article, simply because you thought it looked out of place or made for unbalanced POV. Looking at the first page of your contributions, it seems you removed quiet a bit of information from the National security article that should have stayed, and you often make changes because you think something "looks odd", such as in the List of notable Bathonians article. Again, keep up the good work, but be careful not to remove lots of information without agreement from others. Althepal 22:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments with which I strongly disagree (obviously!) Why would every entry in List of notable Bathonians be bracketed? The bracketed stuff was the occupation of each person, not an afterthought or secondary fact, so bracketing was simply wrong. The National Security article was one of the most unreadable articles I've ever seen until I simplified it (the "average" reader would have been completely lost even if you were not), now others can improve it.
I don't seek agreement from the community because 1. It takes forever 2. BE BOLD (capitals intended) 3. Being a little big-headed here, I'm rarely wrong (judged only by the number of complaints I get). Cheers, and this thread is finished for me- Adrian Pingstone 09:20, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I can't resist quoting a few facts about our relative experience on Wikipedia :
I began editing January 2003. You began editing November 2006.
I have 8295 edits to articles, you have 236. Who's likely to be the better judge of a good edit? - Adrian Pingstone 13:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 'Arpingstone' !

I've noted your soundly reasoned contributions/edits on several (many?!) aviation subjects in Wikipedia with much interest.

As a 'raw beginner' (only from October 2006) I've tried to help on aviation articles, also. I have studied aviation history for several decades - and am still learnin' !

We have both contributed to the 'MyTravel Airways' article. In the last few days, I've contributed data on passengers carried by 'MYT'. Another contributor, 'Airline UK' has been consistently deleting the info. His contributions to Wikipedia are over 90% devoted to MyTravel. I therefore suspect that he is 'in the pay' of MYT. The article is unduly 'laudatory' about that airline's past and present.

If you could spare the time to look at the situation, and give your balanced opinion in the format you think best, that would be most helpful and constructive.

Regards

Ringwayobserver 22:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Ringwayobserver (Alan Scholefield) 31.01.07[reply]

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ringwayobserver (talk • contribs) 22:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I'll be pleased to have a look but I'm off the computer for the next 15 hours so I'll write to you then. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 23:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, I've had a look at the History and its clear it would take me far too long to sort out what is going on so reluctantly I can't help. Sorry again, - Adrian Pingstone 20:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Random Smiley Award

For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award
originated by Pedia-I
(Explanation and Disclaimer)

--TomasBat (Talk)(Sign) 18:33, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ilfracombe

Hello. I'm helping to create a better article on pl.wikipedia about Ilfracombe. To do that, I've uploaded Your photo to Commons as Ilfracombe.jpg, hope You don't mind. With regards, Galileo01 11:56, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Hi, I just came across some of your edits and thought good job. I actually thought I had already given a barnstar to you before for your photographs, but I had not! As you've already got a few, I award you the geographers barnstar for your work on the UK:


File:Interlingual Barnstar.png The Geography Barnstar
I hereby award you a barnstar for your contribution efforts towards the geography of England LordHarris 02:26, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lanc

Please see Image talk:Lanc.600pix.jpg -- Philip Baird Shearer 12:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Aeroarg.a340-200.750pix.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Aeroarg.a340-200.750pix.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. Sherool (talk) 17:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Alm.arp.600pix.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Alm.arp.600pix.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. Sherool (talk) 17:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Airmaur.a3I9-112.3b-nbf.750pix.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Airmaur.a3I9-112.3b-nbf.750pix.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. Sherool (talk) 17:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zabriskie Point Photo

Adrian: I apologize for uploading the photo with the copyright notice. I was a careless error which I have corrected. I hope you'll reconsider the replacement photo. Thanks. Jonathan Kramer JLKRAMER http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Zabriskie_Point

Might you have a new look at it? To me, it looks like blatant advertising. I added the advertisement tag, but it was removed. Should it be taken to AfD? Greetings, --Janke | Talk 08:53, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits were just reverted by Althepal...--Janke | Talk 21:02, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if Althepal owns the company!! - Adrian Pingstone 21:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:F4u.corsair.750pix.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:F4u.corsair.750pix.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 23:22, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with deletion - Adrian Pingstone 14:47, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gloster.meteor.750pix.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Gloster.meteor.750pix.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 01:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with deletion - Adrian Pingstone 11:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

High-res variant has been uploaded. Now if I can find sb to tweak it to improve the colors and mask the background so it looks similar to the first one...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help in removing the endless links.

I appreciate your time.

Jamie L. 16:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for writing - Adrian Pingstone 20:55, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Piper.cherokee.599pix.jpg listed for deletion

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:Piper.cherokee.599pix.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, a non-profit website, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. —Pilotguy (go around) 22:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bell 204/205

I'm trying to put together a [[User:BillCJ/Test Article 3 |test page]] for a possible article on the civil Bell 204 and 205 variants. However, I can find no pictures of obvious civil aircraft of those models. Would you perchance have any of them? I just want to show civil use, so anything non-military would be fine. I'm in no hurry, as I'll have to research and write most of the text myself. Thanks. - BillCJ 06:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for commenting on my photo in the FPC. I noticed you didnt have any problem with the photo subject only with the tilt/distortion. You made a point about correcting the tilt problem in the photo - unfortunately I havent any photo editing software. If you perhaps have the software and the knowledge, you would like to make an alternative if you have time? It would be greatly appreciated. LordHarris 17:05, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Horse anatomy FPC

Hi. In case you want to comment, WikipedianProlific has updated the horse anatomy FP candidate at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Horse anatomy. --KFP (talk | contribs) 17:06, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bristol pics

Hi, No problem with the removal of the Underfall yard pic I did - I was a long way away - there was all this water in between! Seriously I'd really appreciate your help. Could you take a look at Grade I listed buildings in Bristol, Grade II* listed buildings in Bristol & Grade II listed buildings in Bristol & associated articles. I've added pictures where I have them or can get then from geograph, but some are not very good or haven't got pictures at all. Any help appreciated.— Rod talk 16:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Tithebarn.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tithebarn.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:08, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Killer whale FPC

Hello. A Featured Picture Candidate you commented on, Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Killer whale mother and calf, is now in the section for "Older nominations requiring additional input from voters." Contributors have tried to improve it after you commented, and your opinion is welcome as to which, if any, of the available versions deserves promotion. I am sending this message to everyone who participated in the FPC. Thanks! Kla'quot 06:25, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Avianca.anet.arp.750pix.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Avianca.anet.arp.750pix.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 that provides substantially the same information. 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}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

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. —Angr 18:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lustliegh edits

Thanks for your clean up on Lustleigh article, but i think a couple of your cuts were a little harsh. I've put a couple of them back in, because i think their removal got rid of some useful information and background. Being absolutely succinct is not always desirable! Thanks Owain.davies 18:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for your comments, always welcome. In regards to Example 1, I concede that there are too many news in the last part of the sentence (that wasn't a reversion however), however, I really don't think your two sentence structure made any sense, as it split one cadent sentence in two. I'll make a final fix on it.

For example 2, the sentence structure is not ideal with two parentheses, but the detail is relevant, and it would be in a better structure, but I did it quickly, so I didn't forget to go back to it. I totally disagree that it's rambling.

As I said, I agree with most of your edits, i just think your chopping axe is a little too sharp. Personally I'd rather see you reword sentences you don't like, than just remove whole sections which someone's worked on. In any case, please feel free to carry on editing my writing (depending what computer i'm working on, i don't always have a spellcheck for the internet, and as i'm usually making bulk additions, the grammar can sometimes slip), but i might just sneak the odd bit back in! Owain.davies 20:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Blenheim.550pix.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Blenheim.550pix.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 that provides substantially the same information. 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}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

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. —Angr 20:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Architecture

Why did you consider my edits to Architecture vandalism? I was updating the reference tags and doing some general cleanup. --Jrsnbarn 02:54, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huge apologies, I believe my reversion was to an earlier version than yours. I didn’t mention you in my edit summary which said simply “rv vandalism” and I was not in any way referring to you. Of course I looked at the work you had done and wrongly took it to be an attempt to revert item by item. Sorry again. I'm now confused as to what version the article is at. Very sorry for the mess - Adrian Pingstone 09:51, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I thought that's what might have happened given the messy recent history this article has had. I've reverted back to my edit. Cheers.--Jrsnbarn 01:21, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your understanding - Adrian Pingstone 07:52, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can see we're just not going to agree, but PLEASE blunt that axe of yours a little! From my point of view, a lot of the cuts you made led to the paragraphs requiring assumption or some prior knowledge. A good encyclopaedic article shouldn't need prior info to understand why content is there. (just the last example i changed, Military ambulances, you set it to say that they are armoured, which loses something over pre-positioning that with the information that they are going to enter hazardous war zones - pure assumption)

Paragraphs and sections need introduction sentences!

You make some really good edits, but it comes across as being far from constructive just hacking whole sentences out like that, and reducing the quality of the article in the process Owain.davies 20:02, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First I do NOT "hack". Every edit is THOUGHT OUT (capitals deliberate). Neither do I use an axe, I just remove what is unneeded, repetitious or badly phrased.
Here are some facts to demonstrate that I am a highly experienced editor and receive virtually no complaints: I have 13700 (thirteen thousand seven hundred) edits since January 2003, you have 296 edits since August 2005. Scan through my Talk Page above (which goes back to 14th October 2006) and you will find 2 complaints about my edit style, not bad in 5 months!!! Please note that I never remove anything from my Talk Page so what you see on this page is a true record.
Just one comment on your style: many of your introductory sentences state the obvious and removing them in no way affects the sense of what follows. Sadly, I haven't the energy to give further examples or to explain why I edit you so heavily. So now I bow out of editing anything you have edited because there's so much else to do on WP. Thanks for your civility towards me, and goodbye - Adrian Pingstone 22:23, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On language

That writing on User talk:Pumpie what I explained to User:Tony is in Greek but not in Greek letters, but in Roman letters, my keyboard has no ability to type Greek letters. One word metafrasi is translation, arthro is article, einai is is, kalitero is better, eikones is icon and thesi is place. Pumpie 22:59, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, but my comment on your Talk Page was that Tony should not write in Greek on EN. The comment was not directed at you in any way. - Adrian Pingstone 23:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A personal to Arpingstone

That was sweet...you writing to tell me whoever Handicapper is was rude. I don't write articles much anymore, and it's not all Handicapper (who seems to stalk me if I do). Wiki writers are right when they speak of my "tone." I have a lot of trouble toning it down. Not a born encyclopedist (word?), obviously. Plus I'm busy doing my real job, which is writing. Latest book out and I'm doing a bit of a book tour. But even if I weren't, people like Handicapper take the fun out of wiki for me. Not because he/she is exactly wrong, but because he/she is so exactly rude and arrogant. So I've mostly shut my mouth. I really do thank you for your concern. It was very touching here in a strange hotel in New York City where I've touched down for a radio interview.Ki Longfellow 12:36, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Portsmouth.naval.750pix.jpg listed for deletion

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:Portsmouth.naval.750pix.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, a non-profit website, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. Postdlf 17:23, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please delete. Thanks - Adrian Pingstone 18:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:JetstreamXX500.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:JetstreamXX500.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:07, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Please delete.Thanks - Adrian Pingstone 21:39, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gloster.glad.649pix.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gloster.glad.649pix.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 that provides substantially the same information. 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}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

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. —Angr 17:28, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete. Thanks - Adrian Pingstone 21:54, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dassault Falcon 900

Dear Arpingstone,

I understand what you mean about the flags being somewhat repetitive, but as somebody in the creative field (magazine publisher), sometimes a little colour can't hurt. Having said that, what I am attempting to do, and have just done on the Dassault Falcon 900 page, is to put the air arm of the country as a link beside the flag, as opposed to just the country name. So, for example, the UK flag would say 'RAF' beside it, not just 'UK'. A lot of pages seem to be flowing with flag icons. Considering the state of many young peoples (lack of basic) knowledge of geography today, educating somebody as to what a nations flag looks like can't really be a bad thing, IMHO. At any rate, please let me know what you think, I think you'll like to 'new look.' Best wishes from Canada.--RobNS 19:42, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi from Bristol, England. Thanks for your kind reply to my rather curt Edit Summary, sorry if my Summary came over as a little offensive. I haven't changed my opinion on the use of flags, although the change to Air Force names is a big improvement. I still think that putting a country flag against an air force name is a strange mismatch. To use the roundel of that Air Force would be perfect but what a lot of work to prepare all the roundels!
Nor is the Dassault Falcon page (for example) a place where we would want to teach the look of country flags. So you see there is no meeting of minds here! Nevertheless, I will revert no more flags because perhaps others may think them suitable. Best Wishes to you - Adrian Pingstone 20:55, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Air2000.innsbruck.arp.750pix.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Air2000.innsbruck.arp.750pix.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. BigDT 15:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete - Adrian Pingstone 21:19, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sepecat.jaguar.wadd.300601.614pix.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Sepecat.jaguar.wadd.300601.614pix.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. BigDT (416) 01:41, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete - Adrian Pingstone 18:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient Mariner

Hello! I love your picture and the statue of the Ancient Mariner that you uploaded. [Mαc Δαvιs] ❖ 00:36, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Parnall.elf.636pix.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Parnall.elf.636pix.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 that provides substantially the same information. 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}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

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. —Angr 16:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete - Adrian Pingstone 18:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:CO777.PNG

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:CO777.PNG, 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. —Remember the dot (talk) 16:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply