User talk:Emerson7

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  RJFJR 13:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Please leave me a message! I will reply on your talk page.

Redwoods

Hi Emerson - I'm assuming you mean at the list of US State Trees? If that's the one, it is because California has two state trees, Sequoia sempervirens and Sequoiadendron giganteum jointly, so plural is the correct tense to use in this instance. Hope this helps! - MPF 19:22, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Ultrafark?

Why does this NEED to be disproven in an article, and where is the verifiable external reference for it in the first place? Neither was given, so out it went. --JohnDBuell 02:08, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

If it is indeed a meme, along the lines of "Tinywar does not exist," (a quotation used by MUDders to refer to a MUD/chat client program that did/does in fact exist, but it became a running joke to deny it), then it should be presented as a recurring theme/meme, with proper referencing from the board (link to a post or two), and not just put in the description/introduction, which would confuse a reader not familiar with the joke. --JohnDBuell 03:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Plant stem

have a look on that petioles, they are the continuation of the leaves. Stem in botanical sense means that selforganising, evergrowing structure, which holds them only.

Hello! While you had wonderfull idea to add some pictures in to the article of plant stem, which can make it much more accessible and ilustrating to the readers, I would like to ask you if there was some specific intention in the adding the Rhubarb leaves? I would'nt ask you if I would be completely doubting about it, but this image does'nt fit to me over there. That implies, that those leaves have anything more in common with stem than that they are sticking on one. Shortly: it is IMHO missleading. On the other hand, the adding of asparagus was such a great idea (I fear that such idea woud'nt come over my mind) as they are a nice example of commercially used stems never, that in outcome I wonder if I did overlook anything in the case of rhubarb. Maybe the Asparagus stems would be nicer leading picture. What do you thing about it? Reo ^ON | +++ 12:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Emerson, thanks a lot for your quick response :). But that is the case with rhubarb image, that the picture does'nt contein the factual plant stems. Those are petioles or you may call them leafstalks, but the stem is plant organ of diferent ontogenetical origin and of different physiological function for plant. Regrettably there is so little progres as regards the articles about plant anatomy in Wikipedia! Apparently, someone else had the same intent as me,  :) but he did'nt ask and insted .. I hope that you are not upset from this dissent. I think it would be nice job to find other great candidat than just the stems of Asparagus and place them in the head of the article. I will try. Have a nice time with Wikipedia! With regards Reo ^ON | +++ 18:05, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Jane Alexander

In cleaning up the article, I inadvertently omitted the succession boxes you had added. It was an honest mistake I will rectify now. Sorry! (I am going to leave the infobox deleted. It contains nothing not found in the body of the article and merely adds clutter. Thanks!)SFTVLGUY2 13:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Compacting references on Saparmurat Niyazov

Why are you compacting the reference templates on this article? It makes it much more clear when editing the reference itself if the separate parameters to the template are on different lines. --Dgies 19:54, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

it is not really my intent to compact. i was actually 'correcting' the ref data. i don't really have a preference either way (compacted/expanded) but i just thought it would be easier for some if the ref text was inline with text of the article, and expanded in lists. plus, i'm working with a template and it's faster to do them all the same, and fix the layout later since there are currently so many 'edits per minute'. --emerson7 | Talk 21:10, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, I did not notice that. I did notice that the template formatting was all compacted, which made it hard to read. --Dgies 21:30, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Saddam RV

Sorry, I missed the previous reference to the video. Thought I had something new to contribute. I'm new and simply missed the video link. Sorry.

Jaskemr 21:43, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Your revert was in order. I simply missed it. I try to be fair and cite sources. I simply missed this one. My fault. Perhaps a more prominent link to the video? Not sure. I missed it and read the section. Perhaps I'm not the only one. Anyways, no offense taken to the revert. My fault as stated above. Hope to work with you on future articles.

Jaskemr 23:53, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Aaron Copland

Wow! Nice job! The article looks much cleaner and nicer! Thanks for your work on it! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 05:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Awesome! BTW, have you considered joining the LGBT WikiProject? Stop on by and take a look around, and if you're interested, sign up - we'd love to have your participation! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 06:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

El Rancho

The reason these were included is that are multiple hotel/motels and schools that have used this name. The ones with redlinks do not have articles so it is important to note this so that other users are not confused. If I am wrong and they really do have articles under a different name, that the entry should remain with a link to the correct name. That's the main reason for a redirect, alternate names or misspellings. Since this is a dab page, that principal still applies. Vegaswikian 19:00, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Vladimir Horowitz

Nice job on the updates. Thanks for your help!THD3 02:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I reverted your latest edit to Vladimir Horowitz. Your edit makes it sound as if Horowitz was under the influence after 1985. He was not. The medications were started in 1981 and discontinued in 1983.THD3 01:00, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

You're right. The paragraph in question is in very poor condition. It has probably been edited to death. I will attempt a complete rewrite.THD3 16:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I have rewritten the paragraph. Do you have any ideas for a better photo at the top of the article? The 1985 picture now in use is God-awful.THD3 22:28, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Anthony Clark

Why did you revert the changes I made to Anthony Clark's entry? There is no evidence he is gay or atleast that he has come out of the closet on any reputable website. This is akin to someone adding gay categories to Tom Cruise or Clay Aiken's entrys. And if you check, the person who added the gay categories to Anthony Clark's page was a known vandal who has since been blocked. I've removed the categories again, and if you have a problem with it, please discuss on Anthony's talk page. -CJ 21:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, all I wanted was a good reference for proof. Thanks! -CJ 22:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:L'OrdreDesArtsCommandeur.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:L'OrdreDesArtsCommandeur.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:11, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Edits fixed

I made some edits to 2 paragraphs and several dates Leonard Bernstein and you reverted them. I had a look to find out why, and realized that I had added brackets to a couple of unnecessary dates. I have restored the correct edits (but not the superfluous brackets). In future you might consider either (a) correcting only the errors without reverting the entire edit, or (b) informing the user who has made the mistake. Thanks —SaxTeacher (talk) 00:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject LGBT studies!

Hi, Emerson7, welcome to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies! We are a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to improving articles regarding lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, aromantic, asexual and agender people. LGBTQ+ studies covers people, culture, history, rights, and related subjects concerning sexual identity and gender identity - this covers a lot of ground and your help is appreciated! Joining the discussion at WT:LGBTQ+ is a great way to get started. At LGBTQ+/Collaboration, you can find a list of WP:LGBTQ+ participants and task groups. Visit LGBTQ+/Editing for tools to help create, assess, and improve articles on LGBTQ+ topics. LGBTQ+/Resources has style guides, external links, templates, and other tools that support researching and writing articles on LGBTQ+ topics.

-- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 07:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Relax...It'sJustSexDVD.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Relax...It'sJustSexDVD.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 15:29, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

OMG, have you seen Relax, it's just sex? You're the only other person besides me that seems to have seen it! I loved that scene with Diego and Dwight where they're having sex to classical music and talking about what they're going to bring to the church barbecue. Brilliant. Sorry, I don't meet a lot of people who watch the films I watch. :) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 10:55, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Jacqueline du Pre

Please stop correcting the Jacqueline du Pre page! It was I who made significant additions to the page a few months ago (albeit anonymously). At first I did make grammatical errors, but now they are in order. 'At the age of four' makes more sense for the flow of the article than 'at age four'.

And regarding the instrument, the 1673 should not be italicised, as it is not the name of the instrument. That is why I wrote 'an instrument made in 1673'.

I have done much research regarding du Pre, so please leave the page alone. Thank you very much

Ernest Emerson

I'll ask that you kindly leave comments on the article's talk page. Issues of notability have been met. Just because an article is about a man and his company does not make it advertising.

Article is rated as a Good article and is undergoing review as a Featured Article Candidate.

Thank You. --Mike Searson 04:25, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

SFGMC

Thank you for the excellent updates and new block on the San Francisco Gay Men's Chorus article. It seems you have culled some facts from the SFGMC website (and from GMCLA's website as Bruce Mayhall is their conductor, not SFGMC's). SFGMC's website is out-of-date, hence my revisions. FYI, SFGMC's new website will be launched in March. Thanks again, MusicMen 01:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I would be grateful if you would clarify the tag you added today. You tagged the article for "external links clean up". Each of the eight referenced links in the article relate specifically to the content, so I'm confused about the reason for the tag. However, if the tag is related to the "References" list at the end of the article (which are not linked to the article), that would make sense. I will remove many of these as they relate to content that has since been deleted from the article. MusicMen 19:24, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

you left me a note about images, which i don't fully understand. sorry if i'm being daft, but could please explain further? thanks for your help. MusicMen 05:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

thanks for your response, advice and encouragement :-) MusicMen 00:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Saw your note about too many links, so now I'm confused. I thought you suggested that the list of references should be incorporated into the article as relevant links, which is what I have done. Are you saying that I've provided too much evidence of fact? MusicMen 23:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I see you're editing currently, so I'll leave it alone for a while. If you delete references, could you please save them somewhere? I don't necessarily have all of these listed elsewhere. Thanks. MusicMen 00:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I have submitted the article for Jump-a-Class. Perhaps ambitious, but seeing as I've done so much work in such a short time (since the B-Class rating was issued), I thought I'd give it a shot. I'm in the process of collecting old newspaper archives to further reference some of the factual information and I plan to incorporate the remaining few dangling references. Do you have any suggestions for what else I might do? Thanks. MusicMen 22:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Bandini (1963 film) / Bandini (film 1963)

Hi. I didn't do the copy and paste move. I saw two identical pages and I took the one with the improper name and redirected it to the properly named article. I didn't check the history in the process since I wasn't deleting either page. If you think it's more proper you can request that that Bandini (1963 film) be deleted and then Bandini (film 1963) be moved to its title. gren グレン 00:17, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Better Source Request for Image:EstherRolle.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:EstherRolle.gif. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talkpage. Thank you. —Angr 23:13, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:EstherRolle.gif

Thank you for uploading Image:EstherRolle.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. 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. —Angr 23:13, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Gay News

Hi,

I see you reverted my edit to this article. I can't say I'm particularly bothered either way whether "GB£" is blue-inked or not. I just feel it was unnecessary. In my view it's not necessary to have any in depth knowledge of the currency in question to understand the Gay News article.

I'm assuming that pound sterling is a sufficiently well known currency to allow the reader to understand the article without having to research the currency further.

Anyway as I said I'm not particularly bothered either way in this case so I'm happy to leave it as it is.

Jules1975 10:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Cher Infobox formatting

I have a few discrepencied with your reversion of my edits to the infobox in the Cher article.

• Sonny Bono should not be included as a past member, since that field is for groups only.
• Vocalist is an occupation or role, not an instrument, whereas vocals is cited as a singer's instrument on albums.
• The list of occupations and genres are not sentences which means the first member of the list should have the same capitalization as the following members, not capitalize the first member and lowercase the following. Also, the lists should be organized by level of significance or notability, not alphabetically.

Please let me know your thoughts on the above formatting issues. - cgilbert^{(talk|contribs)} 06:44, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

thanks for taking the time to leave a note...it's rarely done, and i admit i should do it more often. that said...the parameters have already been lain for this infobox, i couldn't disagree with you more on your interpretation.

• Sonny and Cher were indeed a group. in fact there were others with them, particularly in the earlier days. When they broke up, they both continued their music careers...one of 'em was a lot more successful as it turns out.

• whereas the the term vocalist might not be the best descriptor, the template gives guidelines on what should go there. based on the guidelines, the voice is the instrument, which sorta makes sense once you think about it.

• though not proper sentence, it is non-the-less a sentence, as well as a list. guidelines for lists require that they be alphabetical or chronological. anything with regard to significance or notability is wildly subjective and therefore not appropriate per WP:NPOV.

take a peek at Template:Infobox musical artist. the article there gives guidance and examples of formatting. cheers. --emerson7 | Talk 08:06, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your take on the formatting. I did find that the Mariah Carey example listed her occupations with the first capitalized and the rest lowercase, however, notice that singer is listed before record producer, which is listed before actress. I also know that Sonny and Cher were a group, and the Sonny and Cher article lists both Sonny and Cher as former members. Cher, however, is not a group, and it is not proper to say that Sonny was a former member of Cher. His musical association with Cher was limited to the Sonny and Cher group, which is the only place where his former membership should be included. On Neil Young's article, you don't see Stephen Stills listed as a former member, even though the two had a duo at one point. - cgilbert^{(talk|contribs)} 16:20, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Your Hyphen on Lily Tomlin's page

Well, if "it's not a typo" as you say, then it's simply improper punctuation. There is no reason to have a trailing, dangling hyphen after the word "Tony" in that sentence as you wrote it:

"Tony- and Emmy Award-winning"

"Tony Award" would not have a hyphen in between the words, if not separated by "and Emmy Award". The hyphen is properly used here: "Award-winning". Think about it again. Find another example or your usage to back it up, if you still think that's proper.--MrEguy | ♠♥♣♦ 20:44, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

At the risk of be overly pedantic, hyphens are joiners that link words to avoid ambiguity or to form a single idea from two or more words. When actually, broken down, the sentence should properly read: "Tony Award-winning, and Emmy Award-winning..." I think we both agree what an awkward sentence that makes. So...we omit words to make a better flow. The hyphen behind "Tony" links it to "Award", hence we 'should' have something akin to "Tony- and Emmy-Award..." showing that Tony and Emmy are being linked with Award.

You are correct, "Tony- and Emmy Award-winning..." is indeed incorrect. The correct phrase should read: "Tony- and Emmy-Award-winning..." --emerson7 | Talk 23:53, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I do realize this is not a terribly big deal. Just for clarity's sake: What you described in the last sentence above is not what I was meaning. Here's what I believe to be correct usage:

1.) Tony and Emmy Award-winning. 2.) Tony and Emmy Award winning.

Here's what I believe to be incorrect usage: 1.) Tony- and Emmy-Award winning. 2.) Tony- and Emmy-Award-winning.

The only place a hyphen is properly used in this instance is between Award and winning, thusly, Award-winning and it's optional. Maybe someone else could offer their opinion. This is making me dizzy :)--MrEguy | ♠♥♣♦ 02:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

oddly enough i didnt even do that, and someone actually hacked into my account, i am changing my pw.. sorry for the inconvience..

With respect, i submit 1.) Tony and Emmy Award-winning. 2.) Tony and Emmy Award winning. are wrong on both accounts. 'How wrong' is but a trifling matter. For reference, check out google for 'suspensive hypenation.' --emerson7 | Talk 19:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

• Can you show me other examples of your usage? I found none on Wikipedia. Here are a few examples I found to support my viewpoint.

See Cynthia Nixon's page Tony and Emmy Award-winning
and Tony Walton's page Tony and Emmy-winning
again here Deaths in July 2006 Tony and Emmy Award-winning

No hyphens are used here.
Shenandoah Apple Blossom Festival - Tony and Emmy Award winning
Hamilton Philharmonic Orchestra - Tony and Emmy Award winning
Pacific Palisades, Los Angeles, California - Tony and Emmy Award winning

Other examples.
List of Poles - Oscar and Emmy Award winning
List of University of California, Los Angeles people - Oscar and Emmy Award winning
Paul Jabara - Oscar and Grammy Award-winning
--MrEguy | ♠♥♣♦ 21:57, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I just happened upon this discussion, but I agree with emerson7. The hyphen in award-winning isn't optional, and the phrase should be "Tony- and Emmy-Award-winning". And what's used in Wikipedia articles most often probably isn't the best source for what is right grammatically. :) --Galaxiaad 06:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Spencer Tracy

I researched and put the academy award nominations neatly into the infobox, but you deleted it. I was just wondering why, since it is seen in that format on other actors' pages. Supertigerman 01:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject newsletter

Request for clarification on linkage...

Could you clarify your justification for removing links on the "Emerson (surname)" disambiguation page? Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ulmanor (talk • contribs) 05:55, 1 March 2007 (UTC).

Image tagging for Image:IBDB.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:IBDB.PNG. 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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Dear Sir,

Was the problem with my edit to the Star Trek page that I didn't cite my text?

If I cite the text next time will it be ok?

Yours sincerely,

Carrotcheese.

John Cage

In response to the following from my talk page:

i know what you mean by changing the place of birth, but i don't believe your interpretation of Template:Infobox_musical_artist#Fields is correct. i think we need to get solid clarification on exactly what the origin field is to represent. --emerson7 | Talk 22:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm just following the format as per the field notes and the sample of Mariah Carey. I would be in favor though of having more input from somebody with more experience from WP:Musicians. Maybe Heaven's Wrath can help us out. - cgilbert^{(talk|contribs)} 22:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Ira Glass

I understand why you reverted my placing of the city into the date of birth sentence, because although it is widespread in usage, the Manual of Style shows that the correct format is just the date. But is there a particular reason you're being really gung-ho about reverting "born" back to "b."? "Born" is more grammatically appropriate. NickBurns 06:09, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Actor infoboxes in general

Is the silver color used for dead people, and the yellow for living? Supertigerman 01:09, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

List of billionaires (2006)

Reason stated in the change description. --wil osb 02:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Again reason stated in why the revert, you wanna revert, fine, at least get the facts correct for Bill Gates and Warren Buffet's net worth. --wil osb 06:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

unbelievable

Please do not write specific criticisms of my editing on my talk page, it is shallow and pedantic Pags182 04:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

the text is not mine...it is transcluded from template. --emerson7 | Talk 05:17, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Re. List of billionaires (2006)

Sorry, when protecting articles, admins will lock on the current version, not on the "right" or "wrong" version. Choosing a version where to lock is to directly involve in the dispute and admins who do this may not protect the article afterwards according to the protection policy. Protection does not endorse the current version of the article though. Now it's time to try to reach a consensus with the other users involved in the dispute, by requesting them to join a civil discussion on the talk page. Once an agreement has been made, the article shall be unprotected. If the other party refuses to talk, then it's legitimate to unprotect and revert to a previous version. Regards, Húsönd 18:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Heh, it was a typical response but not a canned response. I did notice the vandalism, but since the edit war was there, I had to upgrade to full protection.--Húsönd 18:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh well, if the war is over I'll just downgrade to semi-protection. Easy. :-) --Húsönd 18:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Very biased editting, disappointing

who jackbooted the Raymond Burr content, Goebbels? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.225.183.159 (talk) 15:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC).

As much as it may annoy you, Carlos Slim Helu is Lebanese and frequents his native country every few months. Refrain from vandalizing the page if you will.Emбargo 20:39, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Summer of My German Soldier (Television film)

To answer your first question, page names generally should avoid abbreviations. As for citing sources for a movie synopsis, everything should be cited if possible. Pyrospirit ^{Flames Fire} 23:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps it should be moved to Summer of My German Soldier (TV film)? Also, if you think it has enough sources, go ahead and remove the tag. Pyrospirit ^{Flames Fire} 00:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Pee Wee Herman

Wikipedia:Lead section states:

"The lead should be capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article, establishing context...and briefly describing its notable controversies"

That is why I am adding that part. The lead in this article also needs more info on his general career which I will add later today. I am just trying to improve this articles lead section.Hoponpop69 23:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

--202.164.195.56 01:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

queen latifah

hey, your reversion to my queen latifah edits might have been wrong. i was not vandalising the page at all. it needs sources.

cheers --202.164.195.56 01:46, 13 March 2007 (UTC)mike

Dispute on JonBenet Ramsey's article

Before reverting again, read the talk page for what I wrote. 1ne 05:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Quirks&Quarks2.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Quirks&Quarks2.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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

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. 23:09, 13 March 2007 (UTC) end of archive-->

AYBS? characters

I'm not quite sure why you reverted my revert. Mrs. Slocombe always said "My" not "Me", and I cannot understand you reason for revert my edit to clarify that? --Berks105 20:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd disagree on "often", but regardless she usually says "My" and thats what is important. --Berks105 20:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

If she did use it regulary (I don't think once is enough, but nevermind) then it would be best to insert both "My pussy" and "Me pussy".--Berks105 20:32, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Jean Harlow - unsourced claim

Hi. I'm new to Wikipedia, and just getting a feel for how things work, but I don't understand why you reverted a change I made to the Jean Harlow article.

My change was to improve (I think!) the readability of a sentence: It had the awkward construction "when she began to attend school, ... she did not learn until then" ("when" and "until then" serve the same purpose) and unnecessary phrases "a private school" (with a name like Miss Barstow's Finishing School for Girls, it'd have to be) and "with other children" (well, it's a finishing school for girls, so of course).

You reverted this change, calling it an unsourced claim, but it's exactly the same claim that was there before (except, I guess, that it doesn't explicitly claim the school is private and had multiple students). Should it be flagged as "citation needed?"

I apologize if the nature of my change wasn't clear--I know I forgot to include an edit summary.

Thanks --Eostrom 18:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

I saw that you had warned the person at the following IP about vandalism recently, and I just wanted to let you know that it's happened again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:130.194.13.103 Tonight, he vandalized the following page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lasvegas.terra.1500pix.jpg Just letting you know. Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.157.47.150 (talk) 01:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

Vallejo, CA revision

Can you please explain what I did wrong in my revision to the Vallejo article? I want to learn better what is or is not allowed. Thank you.

Brad (EntirelyBS).

Vallejo, CA - edits

ok, understood. but instead of simply removing the section (reverting), can the links simply be taken out of the new content? Or is it now for me to do as my next step (putting them back in but without the links). Thanks, Brad. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Entirelybs (talk • contribs) 16:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC).

Seattle Men's Chorus article - where is it?

I added a link to the Seattle Men's Chorus on an article, and it came up red and didn't connect. I can only get to the SMC page now via cached links. Has the article been deleted? MusicMen 16:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

are you arguing the validity of the change I made? or the change itself?

please clarify - what change? MusicMen 01:06, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

George Szell - flags

Could you please respond to my question on "Talk:George Szell" re use of flag icons? couldn't find the policy you referred to in the edit summary. thanks much--Turangalila (talk) 16:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

List of Billionaires edit

Hello, Thank you for your concern in following my actions on the list of billionaires edit. The only reason I entered in blank text to the page was that someone had put "your mom..." as one of one of the worlds top billionaires. I merely removed it. No vandalism intended. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.166.13.195 (talk) 20:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

Esther Rolle

We clash again. I restored the image request into the infobox on this article, but in my very humble opinion, that no-image image is very aesthetically ugly. NickBurns 20:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Queen Latifah

I just looked at the Queen Latifah page and it looks to be very poorly sourced. I see that it is a personal favourite page for you, so I will not add sources needed labels yet. If you could, could you try to source most of the stuff in the article. I fear much of it is spurious. --Momomoses 07:11, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Harlem footnotes

Thank you for engaging in dialog. I think my discussion on the talk page is clear. There is no justification for applying a footnote to facts not included in the source; that's misleading at the very best, and probably intellectually dishonest. WP:FOOT makes clear that footnotes should follow punctuation when punctuation exists, but does not address what to do where the cited facts have no adjacent punctuation. Since WP:FOOT does state that the footnote should be placed next to the text being backed by the citation, the original placement of the Harlem footnotes seems clearly to be the correct solution.

Your objection about "centuries of precedence" seems irrelevant. If you think WP:FOOT should be changed, there are procedures for that. Uucp 00:32, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to Example. As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. The process of mediation is voluntary and focuses exclusively on the content issues over which there is disagreement. Please review the request page and the guide to formal mediation, and then indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you, [signature]

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Harlem. For the Mediation Committee, ^demon[omg plz] This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to open new mediation cases. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 16:16, 28 March 2007 (UTC).

Hi. I am a member of the Mediation Committee. Can I check whether you would still like to pursue this mediation? I note that there has been no discussion on Talk:Harlem for six days and there doesn't appear to be any dispute in the recent page history. If there are still issues that you feel mediation, please let me know and we can get underway.

Best wishes, Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 11:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi. There's no particular way this "should" work. Perhaps if you could outline to me personally -- by email or through my talk page what your remaining concerns are so I can get an understanding of the issue. Many thanks, Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 16:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for your message. I'm going to start a conversation on Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Harlem. Please go there to discuss this issue. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 17:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I have attempted to summarise the dispute and to set out a course forwards. Could I ask you to make your comments there? Many thanks, Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 13:15, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Ira Glass

Hey, I noticed you reverted without comment my change (back) from "(b. ___)" to "(born ___)" in the Ira Glass article. Wikipedia style for biographies is to use the full word "born" (especially in this part of the article); you can read this at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Dates of birth and death and in the other examples in the Manual of Style (e.g. Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies)). Just wanted to let you know. — brighterorange (talk) 16:56, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Takemitsu

Hi there,

I'm not sure about your recent copy edit on this page. The opening now reads very ambiguously "Tōru Takemitsu (武満 徹 Takemitsu Tōru, October 8, 1930 – February 20, 1996) was a Japanese, largely self-taught composer of contemporary- and classical music" ----- It doesn't make any sense to say Takemitsu WAS a composer of contemporary music, it's an oxymoron. Furthermore the use of 'classical' music when refering to Takemitsu's work is entirely ambiguous and perhaps a little misleading. Also now you have moved the opening biographical information to the section headed 'music', the whole article reads very badly - if you look at the Messiaen page - (which is featured) you can see that this sort of general information BELONGS in the opening, and then further more detailed data belongs in the body. A single sentence to open the article is totally useless, especially when it conveys so little useful information.

I haven't reverted it but I do think it reads badly now and needs reorganising.

Matt.kaner 23:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

yeah, it was erroneously saved by someone trying to be helpful...then i forgot all about it. it had some really big problems with hyper-referencing to start with, but i'll just revert and start over again. thanks for the reminder. --emerson7 | Talk 00:14, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

cool - i'm glad someone else's doing some work on the page. The hyper-referencing is a problem, and completely my fault, but as you know it's always really difficult starting from a completely unreferenced article and gradually working in sources without having time to completely rewrite etc... good luck.

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

SatyrBot 05:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Edit of National Public Radio

I assume it was you who has twice changed the article to put Robert Conley back as the founder of National Public Radio. I assure you that he was not. I was there at the time, as were numerous people who have laughed with me at this total misrepresentation of Conley's role. For a very brief period (a few months) he was the host of All Things Considered at the very beginning of NPR, starting in May of 1971. He was replaced after that short period as totally inappropriate for the role. I know because I briefly replaced him with an another man, Mike Waters, but it was not a role I wanted to keep. All of this is stated by NPR in its official history. See http://www.npr.org/programs/atc/atc30/timeline/1971.html

I am new to Wikipedia, so I do not know how to make a correction the proper way. However, I have been a journalist for 38 years, and have won every important award. I do know the difference between fact and fiction. The incorrect information, now twice restored, about Robert Conley discredits Wikipedia among those who know the truth. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jimborus (talk • contribs) 04:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC).

Sargent

Excellent edits. Bless you! Tim Riley 19:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

But now I look again is the link to the Sargent cancer charity taboo?Tim Riley 19:56, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

César Franck

Hello, why do you inexplicably delete the French flag icon from the place of death in the infobox?

Franck spent most of his adult life in Paris, France, where all of his major works were conposed and performed.

I've reverted this accordingly JGHowes ^talk - 23:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Welsh choirs

You recently reverted [1] an edit of mine removing an irrelevant paragraph from Choir. I had posted my intent to do this on the talk page and received no response. Do you have a reason for reinstating this paragraph? If so, please put it on Talk:Choir. —Wahoofive (talk) 15:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Infobox Radio Show

Hmm to me that sounds like the same as what a presenter/host does - if there is a second person, they are usually co-presenters/co-hosts. Can you give any examples? Or perhaps just suggest it on the Infobox's talk page. -- Chuq (talk) 22:15, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I guess it must be different in Australia; here we have a host/presenter (or co-hosts/co-presenters) who does the bulk of the program. Adverts and promos are pre-recorded and have nothing directly to do with the radio show; station id's are both pre-recorded (again, nothing to do with the show) or just spoken by the presenter; news is read by a news-reader on the hour or the half hour. Most shows have a separate producer who handles talkback calls, mixing, etc. and doesn't have an on-air role. Not that I'm saying you are wrong, but I don't know what else there is. What does the announcer actually say/do? -- Chuq (talk) 02:05, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

sorry...i'm relativley new to this...what do you mean?

François Nicolas Voirin

I have actually started the page. Could you please not change the actual information with subjective statements.

Saying: "Voirin is one of the greatest bow craftsmen of the nineteenth century on par with predecessors Tourte, Dominique Peccatte, Jean Pierre-Marie Persois, and Etienne Pajeot." IS NOT THE SAME AS "Voirin trully was one of the great makers of the 19th century along with his predecessors François Tourte, Dominique Peccatte, Jean Pierre-Marie Persois, and Etienne Pajeot."

Incidentally, the site you mention: http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~leonid/bows_makers.htm is the one that has copied much of the information from Stefan Hersh and other very familiar sources. Others have followed suit: http://www.wps.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/bows_makers.htm as well as http://www.atelierlabussiere.com/bows.htm Merci d'avance. User:Milliot 20:18, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

J.J.Millant

Could you please stop changing the information and the order. I have been expanding much of the Lutherie section. User:Milliot 08:18, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Keith Peck

could you please extrapolate as to why you keep objecting to the Quotes section of the page:

please visit www.keithpeck.com to see what a great many professionals said about this Master Bowmaker: quotes from J.F.Raffin, B.Millant, Elmar Oliveira, Peter Horner of Bonhams, and Gennady Filimonov of odeonquartet. User:Milliot 08:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Can you please explain why it is that you do not approve of a QUOTES section with a referrence to the website as well as a link to a gallery of bows. I started the page, so I believe I know what I am talking about. It seems to me, that you are the one vandalizing this page by deleting relevant information about an American Master Bowmaker.

If you have suggestions about adding information, I welcome that. But deleting relevant information is vandalism in my view. User:Milliot 16 April 2007 (UTC) User:Milliot 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Disruptive edits

If I have permission to use the quotes, I assume that is OK as long as it is stated so........correct? Please let me know. User:Milliot 16 April 2007 (UTC)

it is not only the qoutes. the contents of your edits are non-standard and do not comply with the wikipedia mos. EVERYTHING you post must be properly referenced--particularly quotes. external links must be place in the appropriate section, and stub articles do not require more sections than are necessary, i.e. "biography" section should not lead the article...it is redundant and unnecessary on stubs. you must not remove valid references, and you must not use copy/paste from copyrighted websites. also, the article must make sense. it is not my intent to be unkind, but much of your editing is not grammatically or syntactically correct. further, posting unauthorised 'locked' templates is enough to get you sanctioned by administrator. if you continue with your disruptive edits, i will have to report you. i encourage you to check out the wikipaedia help section for tutorials on how to set up and edit articles. --emerson7 | Talk 19:02, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation. I gather you are not an administrator but rather a contributor? As far as correcting my grammar, you have made plenty of mistakes yourself from the corrections that I have seen. At times, you alter the factual information dramatically. Please understand, that I am expanding the lutherie section and have started many of the new pages.

If I have permission to use the quotes, I assume that is OK as long as it is stated so, correct? Please let me know. User:Milliot 16 April 2007 (UTC)

ps: can you please address this previous question: "Can you please explain why it is that you do not approve of a link to a gallery of bows. I started the page, so I believe I know what I am talking about. This is relevant information about an American Master Bowmaker. If you have suggestions about adding information, I welcome that. "

Perhaps, if you wish to re-organize the deleted sections in the style that you feel is wiki-appropriate, please do. I would like to see the gallery of bows and quotes in the ==External Links== section.

User:Milliot 16 April 2007

yes i know i make mistakes too...i type really fast and i forget to check before i save. as far as the 'factual errors'...all of which are due to my attempts at translating your edits. i don't profess to be as knowledgeable on the topic of archetiers, your edits have been very confusing and difficult to sort out. i am, however, very well versed in writing and editing...and wikipedia. the corrections i (and others) have made to your edits have all been attempts at making them readable and in compliance with standard editing princples use here on wikipaedia. --emerson7 | Talk 19:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation. I gather you are not an administrator but rather a contributor? As far as correcting my grammar, you have made plenty of mistakes yourself from the corrections that I have seen. At times, you alter the factual information dramatically. Please understand, that I am expanding the lutherie section and have started many of the new pages.

Walton

Hi - could you explain why you have amended the style of the birth dates on this disambiguation page, from (born → (b. ?? The change goes directly against the Manual of Style. I've reverted your change, pending your response. Disambiguator 21:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

yes....reference WP:ABB. also protocol suggests that you talk before you revert. --emerson7 | Talk 21:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for reference WP:ABB, but I think you misunderstand its purpose; the abbreviations listed there are to provide consistency if abbreviations are used, but does not force their use, especially (I would suggest) in those instances where the Manual of Style explicitly sets out the standards without abbreviation. For showing dates of birth, please check out Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) and Manual of Style (dates and numbers), both of which require the use of 'born' in full.

As for talking before you revert... you'd have seen from the history of Walton that I wikified this disambiguation page, over several days, in mid-October, so perhaps you might have been less hasty in amending all my edits without seeking my rationale beforehand. Now I have been able to point out these Manual of Style pages, please confirm you will be able to conform to their style. Disambiguator 14:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

As you haven't responded with additional information, I will be changing the format back now, to conform to the Manual of Style. Disambiguator 23:32, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Trolling

Regarding your comment on my page, the user in question was engaging in trolling- intentionally trying to anger and disrupt the Wikipedia community- with an inflammatory quote used inappropriately on his userpage. --ProtectWomen 00:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Not a "what" but a "who" Proabivouac [2] [3]--ProtectWomen 00:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Keith Peck

can you please explain why you object to an external link to his gallery of bows. For people who are interested to know about this maker, they are most likely to be interested in seeing his work. If you don't mind, I would like to keep the link, as it is relevant in my view. There are plenty of other pages where they offer external links. Hope you understand.Milliot 04:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Greetings Emerson. I noticed you have also contacted this editor; I just left him a polite warning about copyright violations (Giuseppe Fiorini was taken from here, but since it's down you can see it cached here). I haven't looked through the rest of his edits yet, but I hope we can get him to follow our copyright policies. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 04:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Yah, I know, these kind can really eat up your time ... he's adding good information that we need, but just doesn't seem to understand the importance of copyright compliance ... Antandrus (talk) 05:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

About the Ralph Waldo Emerson article

Hey Emerson, I revised the R.W.Emerson article because some things were repeated in the article. Why did you decide to change back? --Cantaire87 18:17, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

If you want to keep the current version of the R.W.Emerson article, please do consider editing the first three paragraphs.--Cantaire87 18:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Thomas Beecham

No, I didn't. I reverted to the version prior to the editing by the banned editor intentionally, and you were welcome to make your edit again if required. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 23:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Henry V

Fair comment. No offence meant. AndyJones 21:23, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Academy Awards

Hi, I see your edits to the Acting Records section. Thanks for your help in improving that article. I "undid" the edit because I felt that some (not all) of the edits were unnecessary, inconsistent, and grammatically incorrect. I see that you then "undid" my edit, with a comment to the effect of "It's called copy-editing, not list making." I don't want an edit war, and I am sure we are both here to improve the article. So, any suggestions as to how to handle our (for lack of a better term) "disagreement"? Please let me know. Thanks. (JosephASpadaro 00:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC))

Rimsky-Korsakov a Romantic?

I see you have just labelled R-K as a Romantic. I think if you check the reference books you'll find this isn't accurate, e.g. Richard Taruskin, the Russiuan opera expert in the New Grove Dictionary of Opera who doesn't use the word Romantic once in his whole article. (He does talk about "historical realism"). Regards --Kleinzach 07:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Musical artist infobox images

Still trying to figure out why its broken :( --soum (0_o) 06:07, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Can you help with a list of articles where its broken? Random sampling of what transcludes the template is not helping. --soum (0_o) 06:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. I had already nailed it down to manually specifying sizes. I will try to modify the template to add the px only when its not specified. --soum (0_o) 06:41, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

B. Fuller

No problem. Thanks for the heads up. — goethean ॐ 13:54, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

References

I disagree with you. Footnotes are referenced within the text and may refer in a short-form manner to the Reference section below. -- Ssilvers 19:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Puccini

I disagree with you about the italics of the "O mio babbino caro," especially when there's a reference to "Nessun dorma" on the same line without italics. I'm glad you put the infobox back though, I find it to be one of the stupidest things I've seen done on Wikipedia yet. What's your stance on the infoboxes in composer's articles?
NewYork1956 22:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

lol...of course you know what my response that is, right? my reading of WP:MOS#Foreign terms (and the Chicago Manual of Style) is that they should all be italicised. the qoutes, of course still necessary.
it's great that you let your opinion known on the puccini talk page, but be sure to also visit the page where the infobox debate is currently raging [4]...and tell a friend!--emerson7 | Talk 22:57, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry pal, but you got it all wrong. The Wikipedia:Manual of Style (music)#Italian music terms page says "most Italian music terms are well-known enough to be considered part of the English language. Commonly used terms should not be italicized." Included in the list is arias. "O Mio Babbino Caro" is an aria, not a foreign term. I will be changing it back now.

NewYork1956 23:31, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Radio

Interested in joining WikiProject Radio? --PhantomS 02:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Your reversions in Elizabeth Taylor

I noticed that you reverted several of my edits to Elizabeth Taylor (diff). Could you explain your reasoning? - Ben Ram 07:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

In the absence of any response, I'm going to restore my changes to the article. My edit summaries should make it clear why I believe these changes are necessary. Please, if you intend to revert to your version again, at least engage in discussion first. - Ben Ram 05:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

flagicons

That was the idea. However, it seemed like a better idea to do it with some people aware (in case of fallout, etc). –Unint 03:52, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Smith

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Smith. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Thank you. -- JHunterJ 01:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Morris

You are going contrary to WP:DATE in the date of birth formats for Morris as well, as I mentioned in my edit comment. Please fix it -- living people's dates are given as "First Last (born YYYY)". -- JHunterJ 01:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Gramophone (magazine)

I don't understand why you reverted my change of the references and sources to standard Wikipedia format — nor why your edit summary referred to this as "copy-editing". --Mel Etitis (Talk) 08:18, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you haven't had the courtesy to reply to me, but have simply insisted on reverting to the curiously non-standard format. This is disruptive, and editors are often given editing blocks for such behaviour. I see from other comments here that this isn't an isolated example. Please don't let this get out of hand. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 22:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Rollback

Please be aware that using rollback in content disputes is very strongly frowned upon. Mak (talk) 15:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Rollback

This is a blatant misuse of TWINKLE. Wonderful as that rollback script is, it's not to be used for content disputes, nor for labelling good-faith edits vandalism, though I assume that was a mistake. Please don't.

As regards the actual dispute itself, have you considered that calling the Pittsburgh Symphony his "Associated act" doesn't make a huge amount of sense when talking about a classical composer? Quite apart from the consensus that these redundant boxes are not to be used on composer articles. Moreschi ^Talk 15:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Morris

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Morris. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Thank you. -- JHunterJ 17:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

List of HIV-positive people

Hi, thanks for copyediting this list. I did reverted some of your changes though. It's better to keep question marks in years. That at least gives more information than just stating "unknown". I also removed the (b. 1953) way of writing. The way it is now is more consistent with other simular articles. Garion96 (talk) 20:18, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I stand corrected concerning the open ended date formatting. I do prefer it when it's "born" instead of the abbreviation "b.".

Regarding the question mark(s). It might be non-standard, but it still gives more information than just unknown. Sometimes we do know the decade, but not the complete year. Then it's better to at least give some information we have. Garion96 (talk) 01:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject newsletter

sorry was just trying out dint see the sanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:emerson7&action=edit&section=new# 86.131.129.131 17:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)dbox86.131.129.131 17:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Pere d'Alberní i Teixidor

1.- That does not explain why do you remove the flag, nor why do you undo my whole edit.

2.- About the picture, I have read several studies that talk about the history of the Spaniards and the Catalans in the Pacific Northwest, and also about Alberní, and there wasn't any picture of him. Neither looking at google. On the contrary, I have found pictures from much less important people, such as Esteban José Martínez. Therefore, I can conclude that there is no picture of Alberní. And that image with the big "?" is ugly and ruins the layout, so why not remove it? It's just a matter of taste.

3.- About the fact that "it wasn't called California", well, I suggest you to read the references. All of them talk about him as "Acting Governor of California". Furthermore, there are several articles talking about the province of California in the times of New Spain: List of pre-statehood governors of California, California (province), etc. I've never traveled to the 18th century, but looking at the sources... I think you are wrong. In fact, how can you say that it not exist, if you added the template for "Governor of Alta California"? You are recognizing that it existed with that...

4.- Finally, about "Acting", ok, it may not be capitalized, but two things: "acting-governor", with the "-", is neither correct, and if you change it, at least change it in all the cases that "Acting" is mentioned in the article. Onofre Bouvila 19:49, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, by the way you added Alta California, if you check its article, you can see that the name "Alta California" dates back to 1804, not before... Onofre Bouvila 20:14, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

"dude...i'm not interested in playing a game of one-ups-manship...just trying to make a good article. i trust that too is your aim"

Well, then stop adding unsourced stuff to the article, and removing things like the caps, because for example, in Honoured Citizen of Barcelona, that must be in caps, because it's an official title. The same for Governor of California, check the Arnold Schwarzenegger article, it's in caps there also. And the same too for "Company"; if it's "Company" and not "company" is because I am talking about a concrete Company, and I write Comapny instead of First Free Company of Volunteers of Catalonia because it's shorter, but to indicate that I am talking about a concrete company, and not about the concept of "company", I write it in caps. So all in all, if you wanna add something positive to the article that's okey, but stop manipulating it for unclear purposes. Thanks. Onofre Bouvila 12:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

It is not that you are correcting few spelling, that you are also writting false stuff, like that he was "Governor of Alta California" (when Alta California was officially created in 1804), and you don't mention that, eh? Who is being "indiscriminate, retaliatory, vindictive"? About what you said that "titles, unless used with proper nouns are not capitalise", well, I have written the article according to the sources I had, and it will remain so until you provide new sources that prove your statement. Also, you are removing other stuff such as the caps from "Honourable Citizen of Barcelona", which is absolutely wrong, because that is an official title, just that I translated it from Catalan (Ciutadà Honrat de Barcelona). And it goes in CAPS.

So all in all, your edits are incorrect in most of their cases, because you are just introducing your own nervies in the article without providing any source. Create a post in the talk page, provide sources that support your changes, and then, let's discuss about it. But don't go there and start removing caps and stuff because that is illogical. For example, in some cases, you are changing "Governor of California" to "governor of California", and in other cases, you leave it with the caps. So in conclusion, your edits don't follow any kind of logic but just your aim to manipulate in some way the article. All you do is to revert the upgrades I do to the article, because you haven't even done any substantial contribution to it.

Just check this, an official page from the State of California, and it capitalizes it several times, so, according to these official sources, your statement "titles, unless used with proper nouns are not capitalised" is false. [5], etc.Onofre Bouvila 16:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:BennettRiley.png

Thanks for uploading Image:BennettRiley.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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

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. 22:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

J.B.Vuillaume

Thanks for trying to "clean up" but in doing so, you have either deleted very relevant information on makers that worked for Vuillaume and or changed certain meanings of models he worked on such as "Le Messie" Strad meaning the "Messiah" Strad.

I think that the opening quotes cut to the chase in defining one of the most celebrated makers of the 19th century. If you don't mind, let's leave them. Many have already told me they like the article as it looked. Thanks for your input.Milliot 09:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Why are you tagging this wikipage with a cleanup tag? You have tried to make corrections, but instead you delete relevant information, and change spelling of some things that should not be changed. If you are not familiar with some of the words in Lutherie, please don't feel compelled to change them. Thanks . And BTW, are you an official wiki editor?

Can you please address my questions?Milliot 19:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Composer infoboxes

You recently spoke, on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Composers or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera, against the blanket removal of infoboxes from articles about composers, or in an attempt to reach a compromise solution. Despite around a dozen people doing so, there are claims that consensus for their blanket removal was reached. You may be interested in the ongoing debate on the former talk page. Andy Mabbett 10:27, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Your image uploads

Hi, regarding some of your image uploads:

1. You've been adding the text, "It is believed that images published in excess of one hundred years are in the public domain and the use of this image is permitted under US copyright law governing public domain properties." It's actually anything published before 1923 is public domain in the U.S. However, you need to be certain that it was published (meaning, made available to a large audience in some sort of permanent format) and not just created, because unpublished works are subject to different rules. See [6] for more details.
2. You've been tagging these as {{PD-old}} which is only for when the creator has died more than 100 years ago. If the creator is unknown, you can't use this template.
3. Some of your images are public domain for other reasons, such as Image:RichardBarnesMason.png, which states right on the image that it was made by the U.S. Army Signal Corps, making this a work of the federal government and therefore public domain by definition.

Would you mind going back through your image uploads and fixing what you can? I'll be happy to help you out with anything you can't figure out. Thanks for your attention to this matter and thanks for finding such great images! howcheng {chat} 16:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:ManuelMicheltorena.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:ManuelMicheltorena.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. howcheng {chat} 18:36, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Ordering of categories

Thanks for your message. Most articles, in my experience, don't have their categories in strict alphabetical order, but if I have disturbed any where they are in order, I apologise.--Runcorn 06:58, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

It would break my heart, if I could never edit wikipedia for the worst again.

Vandalism ?

Being warned for vandalism for adding a {{clear}} ? That's a bit much.

I added this template because with firefox, the photo is over the text, so it's illegible. http://img329.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshot007ia9.png If you have a better idea than the clear template, please do (be bold, they say, but maybe not as to tagging users as vandals for nothing)... Gohu1er 10:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)