User talk:Nmajdan

This is NMajdan's talk page. To leave me a new message, please click here.

WikiProject Wikify Alert: Check out the backlog cleanup taskforce

This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 30 days are automatically archived to User talk:Nmajdan/Archive 1. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Archives
1

Please Review

Hello, I am getting ready to propose 2005 Texas Longhorn football team for consideration as a featured article. The article has had one reveiw already and I believe all issues raised there have been addressed. I have also used the semi-automated review script to look for small things that need to be changed. The article is meticulously referenced with 121 in-line sources. It contains both free-use images and appropriate fair-use images. It attempts to follow the standards set out by the relevant wiki projects.

In watching the nomintaion of the OU football program, I see that the OU article has received some objections on the grounds of supposedly being overly positive and for listing too-many awards. I have reviewed the 2006 UT article in light of those objections and I am prepared to argue that every positive thing said is relevant and attributed to a specific source. As for the awards and accomplishments, I think all the ones listed in the UT article are notable and justifiable, but I'd like to get more feedback from other editors so I invite you to review the article if you please. Johntex\^talk 09:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I have requested peer review here. Good luck in the Fiesta and have a Happy New Year! Johntex\^talk 00:22, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Picture

Hey, I was wondering how can I upload a picture too a page I wrote? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Himanko (talk • contribs) 01:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC).

Oklahoma Sooners football under Bob Stoops

Hey, thought that I'd let you know that I've created a stub for this article. I expect that we'll need to flesh it out pretty quickly to avoid an AfD. I'll move over a lot of the info from Oklahoma Sooners football later on today. z4ns4tsu\^talk 20:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

College football barnstar

		The College football Barnstar
		I, BigDT, present you with the new college football barnstar for your phenomenal work with college football articles this season. BigDT 22:01, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Liisenber uploading copyright material

Hi Nmajdan, regarding your report to WP:AIV: that page is for cases of blatant vandalism only. Since your case is too complex for AIV, I moved your report to here. --Deathphoenix ʕ 14:43, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. :-) --Deathphoenix ʕ 14:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Picture

Hey man, thanks for the help. I was just trying to get the picture in as a stepping stone for the article. Although there isn't much information on the SEC Fanfare, I was just trying to put something pertinant to the article in there. I'll scan a high res copy on later, thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mastrchf91 (talk • contribs)

Article for Deletion

Could you nominate this article for deletion, Francis Price. This article is completly false and just a vanity page. I would do it but I don't understand how to do it. Thanks for your help. HorseApples 23:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair Use template before May 4, 2006

Nope. I asked and was told to put them up for WP:IFD. They haven't gone through deletion yet (ie, been 5 days) I think, so I don't know if this is an effective method yet. I have some on Jan 4 (maybe earlier, I don't remember and too lazy to look) so we can watch those to see if they poof. If you're tagging lots of images you could look into adding the quickimagedelete script to your monobook. It even helps with the IFD process and saves a ton of time. --MECU≈talk 15:45, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Yup, IFD. Logos are pretty safe as the rationale seems fairly obvious. You could just write the rationale for it. Look at a few other similar logos to see if they have a rationale and just cut and paste and make the few minor changes they need. --MECU≈talk 15:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes. For example, the IFD. Once you click it, and enter the IFD reason, it should open 3 pages and edit them appropriately and save them automatically. You just sit back and wait. I use it on Firefox 2 with no troubles. Make sure you have the required addons for the installation. See User talk:Howcheng/quickimgdelete.js#Requirements, they're kinda hidden so you may have missed it. --MECU≈talk 21:46, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I didn't see Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/addLink in your monobook.js. I saw the other function though. --MECU≈talk 21:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Weird, I even searched for "addLink". Anyways, if you look at Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/addLink it says it's an "improved" version, so maybe try and install that one and remove the one you currently have? --MECU≈talk 22:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

And I'll say this for the obvious, but just to make sure: You've reloaded the page on your monobook.js? Hitting CTRL-SHIFT-R? --MECU≈talk 22:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm out of ideas. You could copy my monobook.js and delete yours and paste mine in and reload just to see if it works. If it does, then you've got something else in your monobook causing problems. Best I can think of. Sorry. --MECU≈talk 22:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I saw a lot of good stuff on yours that I'd like to use, so if you figure out what causes the error, let me know so I can avoid that one. Glad to help. --MECU≈talk 22:46, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

how to change the title in grey

I need to change the title of my contribution in grey color to from 'Ma xiaonian' to 'Ma Xiaonian', but don't know how. Please help me out. Thanks.--Qingma 19:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Oklahoma Sooners football FA

I was reading through the FA candidate discussion for Talk:Oklahoma Sooners football. It looks like those that criticized the POV of the article wanted it to be more like a soccer team's article. Have you searched any of those? Wikipedia:WikiProject_Football#Featured_and_good_articles I think the article looks great. I suppose there could have been more about the probations and the scandals, but from their comments it looked like many of the reviewers were unfamiliar with the nature of college football, except for JonTex. Shouldn't the article instead indoctrinate those unfamiliar with the Sooner Football team? I'm pretty new to editing in Wikipedia. I'm trying to get a TCU Horned Frogs page going, then I want to do one on TCU Football. Just looking at that soccer project page and the list of featured articles they have makes me want to get a lot more college football featured articles. General125 20:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

2007 BCS National Championship Game

I added a hidden note to 2007 BCS National Championship Game warning people not to change the rankings. Doesn't the same thing apply to the win-loss record? I thought that was supposed to be coming into the game, not after. I want to double check prior to changing it. Johntex\^talk

Thanks, I fixed it and put in a note. I will also put in a hidden note in the Template itself. Johntex\^talk 20:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Path to 9/11 Image

It looks like it has been removed from the article it was in, so it should be deleted. Hello32020 23:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

goswin schwendinger

hi there

Could you tell me why the ablove article is considered for deletion? i appreciate your response. regards

goswin Goswin 15:42, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

deleting

thank you for your kind answer. can't wait for deletion, really. have a good day.Goswin 16:02, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

I have blocked you because of the possibility that you were running an unauthorised bot. All bots need to be authorised first, and I will unblock you if you can explain your recent edits and agree to seek a bot flag if one is necessary. J Di 17:10, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know what this is referring to. I just created a script that allows me to quickly add {{welcomeh}} to new users' talk pages, if that is what you are referring to. Check out User talk:Nmajdan/welcome newuser.js for details on the script. I didn't think there would be an issue.--NMajdan•talk 17:13, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

It's the speed of your edits. I will unblock you, but you need to slow down with the welcoming. Many people don't welcome users until they have made an edit anyway. J Di 17:22, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, sometimes its better to make the first contact with a new user before they inadvertently make a bad edit. I'll slow down on the edits.--NMajdan•talk 17:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, you're unblocked. J Di 17:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bad Image.jpg

You have marked Image:Bad Image.jpg to be speedy deleted and have posted me a message (User talk:Geevee#Fair use rationale for Image:Bad Image.jpg). It is marked with {{albumcover}}, the link to it in Bad Image article is marked with comment of fair use. I don't understand, what's wrong with image? Geevee (talk) 19:22, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Should I just add that stereotyped text ("== Fair use for [[ARTICLE NAME]] == ...") at the image page? Geevee (talk) 10:59, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Mathyas

Thank you for the welcome. Are you speak spanish?

User:Mathyas

Vengeance Trilogy DVD image

I just uploaded an image and immediately received a message saying this image has no fair use rationale and is a category for speedy deletion. Why? I have never received this before when uploading a DVD cover. I correctly marked the image with the DVDCover licensing tag. As far as I was aware, DVD cover images are allowed on Wikipedia. Gram 14:55, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, forget it. I looked on another user's talk page where you done the same thing and I see that the rules of Wikipedia have changed in the night, and now we have to justify every DVD cover and album cover we upload. I don't quite understand the argument though - I would have thought that the justification / rationale for uploading these types of image would be the same in every single case - namely, low quality, illustrative of the article, blah blah. Personally I think the DVDCover tag should be sufficient, and if it's not, it should be amended to include a good standard piece of rationale itself, because as it stands, I have to make something up myself (or copy it off some other user), and in 6 months time that rationale probably won't conform to your next rule change. I presume I'm (currently) allowed to write a rationale and copy-paste it for every CD and DVD cover image I upload from now on. So why can't you or some other wikipedia crusader make one available that everyone can use? Whatever, I'll write something. But if it doesn't conform to some standards that I'm not currently aware of please can you let me know rather than just deleting the image in a week's time. Thanks. Gram 15:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

.

Thankyou for showing concern. Usually only one image would be needed to summarize an article and identify it visually which is very important for educational purposes and to know exactly what the article is discussing. Anybodt who is familiar with the series may not relaise what it is discussing until an image puts it in place. I have added a rationale but I will try to only limit one image per episode aside from the title. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

In that partifcular episode there were unusally two main villains!! Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I will gradually add it to the other images I wan't aware the full rationale was needed I presumed the brief and the licensing tag was enough. I am now over half way of covering the entire series of randall and hopkirk and I beleive one key image of each episode aside from the title is an extremely useful asset. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 15:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• Oh! I mistakenly wrote fair use rational on its descreption page while uploading this logo. NAHID 15:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
• There are lot of logos that doesn't have fair use rational. Has that tag been added only for this sentence fair use rational of SEU logo ?? Thank you NAHID 15:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
• But there are thousands of logo without a single rational. Is the problem with that sentence I mentioned avobe. NAHID 15:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I've added the rational. Another thing the educational logos that are uploaded before (but after may 2006) do I need to mention their rational?? NAHID 16:23, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• But even featured article (educational) logo doesn't have rational. I can't remember their name though. Why they are get nominated? Thanks anyway NAHID 16:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
• One more thing, is there any problem if I writedown the same fair rational sentences on logos that are related to university or any organizations if I were the uploader? Thank you NAHID 16:44, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
• Could you please mention some image deletion tags? I want to delete some images that falls in same category and they refer same subject at a time. For example, I uploaded some logos of an university. One of them is real and others are fake / created by someone else. Thank you NAHID 17:45, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
• Oh, I uploaded a new version of an image. But why its previous image is still exist? I don't need that. Thank you NAHID 18:11, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

User welcoming

Hi - good work welocmieng new users! I noticed that you welcomed [1], who later turned out to be a vandal (now indefinately blocked). Can I suggest that you welcome new users who have one or two edits showing that they're not vandals first? Other than that, keep up the good work :) Martinp23 17:55, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

ASU College Seal

Please go forward with the deletion of that particular image. It was a test upload. I saw no way to delete the image after uploading. Thanks User talk:Scotcra1

Dramnyen

Sorry the licence shoudl have been cc 2.0 I have changed it accordingly. ray 01:56, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh okay. I'll remove the link as well, and maybe just have an external link to the photo. Thanks for pointing this out. Cheers. 141.151.164.149 05:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC) oops thats me ray 05:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

about MED street corner.jpg

Well, I know it's a free software but I need to add program's name and it's publisher?

like this:

create with Delta Force: Xtreme Mission EDitor, DFXMED.

publisher: NovaLogic —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SchwarzKatze (talk • contribs) 09:32, 13 January 2007 (UTC).

Hello

Hello, Mr. Majdan. Anyway, My name is Patelco and I've just got one message: Drop It! OK? because what I am trying to do is to help the goosebumps pages and frankly no-one except me is gonna help it. I'm sorry for my outburst up there it's just I mean i see where you are going with this and you think I'm one of tgose vandalism guys, well I'm not Ok? look, I'm just telling you this now cos' all I want to do is help. Oh, yeah I have given the images copyright status and that so i don't really know where you are going with this. Again I am just telling you know instead of later.

Have a wonderful day and a bright future

- ₪Patelco☻ 19:50, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

OU peer review

Thanks for your patience. I have completed my review and my suggestions list here. Please don't feel you have to go with every suggestion. There may be good rational in some cases for the way the article is currently written. Good luck, I hope it makes FA. Johntex\^talk 04:48, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Yugoslav Academy of Sciences and Arts

"Yugoslav Academy of Sciences and Arts never existed." That is not true. Yugoslav Academy of Sciences and Arts existed since 1867 until 1991 in Zagreb when changed name in Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts. Maybe its name was wrong because it was academy (only) for Croatia, but that academy existed! Many scientists was members of that academy with that name! But, academy for whole Yugoslavia never exists, every republic had own academy (Serbian until 1886, Slovenian, Montenegrin until 1973 etc.) Regards. --Djordjes (talk) 06:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Adrian Peterson OUvsBSU.jpg

If you're talking about Image:Adrian Peterson OUvsBSU.jpg about the license being changed, then I don't think they can "take back" the release of a license. Especially, if we used it under that license. I am probably not fully qualified to answer this, so you should seek a second opinion. I know that a GFDL license can't be revoked, once it's out there it's out there; I would think CC licenses would be the same. You should ask for help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. The problem them comes on how to verify the image license was changed? On commons, an admin will come along for some images and state that "yes, this image was under this license on this date" so if they change the license or it gets deleted somehow, the image can still say since there are two people (one an admin, very trusted) saying the license is such. I've seen this happen to some of the images I uploaded at commons and can find one for an example if you'd like. --MECU≈talk 22:06, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I have moved the image to commons: commons:Image:Adrian Peterson OUvsBSU.jpg and marked the image here as replaceable as the same image exists on commons. I've asked on IRC for an admin to verify it on commons and mark it with the tag that they approved/agreed with the license. Once the image is deleted here at wikipedia, the commons will automatically show up, and once admin approved at commons, it will forever be okay to use. (I had to move it to commons because Wikipedia doesn't have anything like that.) --MECU≈talk 22:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned Image

Sure no problem the image won't be useful to me anymore since it can't be used for my original purpouse, so it can be deleted no problem-Dark Dragon Flame 22:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

1927 Georgia Bulldogs football team

NMajdan: I was in the process of writing you about this when I saw your latest change. Yes, it is only a redirect to Georgia Bulldogs football under Kid Woodruff#1927 Season. I think it is a NA, but don't know if the banner needs to be there at all. Since there was already a banner there, I thought I'd leave it. Do you know if a custom has been developed for redirects?--Tlmclain | Talk 23:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I've taken the banner off. With respect to those Auburn pages, they're on my list to merge, I just don't know when - I keep coming up with new projects without finishing ones I've started . . . . . --Tlmclain | Talk 23:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - Midwinter1.jpg

Thanks for sorting out the licence on this picture - I did wonder how to do it at the time, but couldn't find any obvious info. I'll know now!

Bassophile 09:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Baby Gender Mentor

FYI, I've done some final cleanup (helped by another editor) and I have nominated Baby Gender Mentor for FA. We'll see how it goes. Thanks again for your help. Best, Johntex\^talk 01:25, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

The nomination is here if you would like to comment. Johntex\^talk 20:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

WPCFB talk page

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football how's it look now? --MECU≈talk 14:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Moving pages

You want to stop and discuss this renaming for a bit please? Talk:2006 NCAA Division I-BS football rankings --MECU≈talk 17:11, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Hallo

Please dont delete the article with the name Sherzaman Taizi and its image. i have the copyright of that. but i couldnt mention during the upload process cause i forgot.

kind regards Ibrahimkhel— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibrahimkhel (talk • contribs)

Ok Send me the link to put my reference

Send me the link so that i put the information of the image i cant find it now. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ibrahimkhel (talk • contribs) 22:49, 18 January 2007 (UTC).

BUT how do i add the source information??????

BUT how do i add the source information??????

The picture belongs to the author he sent me via email. Its he who has taken the picture and he sent it to me to publish it in wikipedia along with his biography.

i dont know how to add that information

i know nothing more. just do whatever you want to do or whatever the wikipedia wants to do. weather you will keep it or not.

if you want me to stop writing in wikipedia then i would do it. just dont bother me with many warning notes anymore. i dont have that much patient. well goodbye —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ibrahimkhel (talk • contribs) 22:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC).

OK

Now i have done what you said. dont send me any more messages. I will not do anything more for you. Just let me live with peace. I have written all the information now.

National Titles

NMajdan: Before taking this idea to the entire group at WP:CFB, I thought I'd run the idea by a couple of guys that seem to be level-headed, have experience in the Project and are telented designers. I have become convinced that we need a fully-integrated solution to infoboxes and football championship article. I think that if we can give some semblance of order to the football championship article, then the infobox problem will solve itself. My idea is to redo the main year-by-year table to fully report all claims to the National Title in each year, but designate the "Wire Champ" and the "Consensus Champ" each year. Then the infoboxes would reference "Wire Champs" and "Consensus Champs" and tie back to the year-by-year table. Take a look at National Champ project and you will see a few sample years that illustrate how this would work. The sources for the poll information will be the NCAA and College Football Data Warehouse. Let me know what you think about the idea and, if you like it, how it can be improved. Also, you are more than welcome to fool around with my test table. Thanks--Tlmclain | Talk 03:28, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I also solicited the help of MECU and he found my initial message less than clear. I have posted a much more detailed description of my "vision" on his talk page.--Tlmclain | Talk 05:26, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. Please let me know if there are any other hotly contested years to add to the sample table. At MECU's suggestion, I am going to add 1967, which is one of the years that Tennessee fans seem to fight about (it already has 1941 for the Alabama folks). The idea is to include a selection of the more controversial years to that participants in the discussion at WP:CFB can better evaluate the table and the approach when I post it there.--Tlmclain | Talk 16:03, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

NMajdan: I just went live with the presentation of this idea on WP:CFB at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#National Titles. Your input would be appreciated.--Tlmclain | Talk 22:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Fritzbot

Yes, it's still operational, I just have been busy with other stuff lately. I'll let it run through the unused images somewhen next week. --Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 14:38, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Rutgers and OU Peer Reviews

Thank you for taking the time to offer your comments and suggestions regarding Rutgers University. Though a couple days late, I was able to reciprocate for the University of Oklahoma peer review. I am quite impressed by the article, and it's given me several ideas I can take back to improve the Rutgers article. When this does go up for FA candidacy, please do let me know, because I will gladly support it. —ExplorerCDT 20:52, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

CFB Schedule templates

Hello, I am about to make some 2007 season pages and I'd like to use the templates, but it looks like attendance did not make it in. Would it be possible to add this? I think it is important. Thanks for your help with this and also thanks again for your review of BGM. Best, Johntex\^talk 04:33, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Did we decide to not add it or did we just not decide to add it? I don't recall any opposition to it being included, though I seem to remember no one but me was pushing for it. Since you have made so many of the fields optional, perhaps attendance could be included and made optional as well? Johntex\^talk 16:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Excellent!! Thank you!! I guess I must be one of the few who thinks a record of the attendance is important. Anyway, I will now convert the table I just made at 2007 Texas Longhorn football team into these templates. Best, Johntex\^talk 16:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

OU Peer Review

I've added some comments to the OU Peer Review. I've also made a whole bunch of minor corrections and edits to the article. --ElKevbo 16:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

OU Talk page

Is there a particular reason you deleted material from the OU Talk page? I assume it was an accident but if you could restore the comments it would be appreciated. Thanks! --ElKevbo 21:50, 24 January 2007 (UTC)