User talk:Floridan

Welcome!

Hunt yests

What, you've never heard of hunt yests?  :-) For some reason, my finger kept hitting the Y instead of the T and I thought I had caught them all. BTW, thanks so much for adding that article! Elf | Talk 05:35, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk protocol

Good question--most people answer on the other person's talk page because then that person receives the "you've got a message" notice. Some people respond on their own talk page, but most of them (the experienced ones anyway) usually ahve a note at the top of their talk page that says that's what they do. I sort of play the middle--I expect people to answer on my talk page, but whenever I leave a msg on someone else's talk page, I also add them to my watchlist for a week or so to see whether they respond there. I just might not notice it as fast (I have a rather large watchlist). Elf | Talk 05:52, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Hunting dog article

Someone added some details about various hunting dog types into the dog article, which was overkill for that particular article, but it was a good start at filling in info for the hunting dog article, which so far has been just a list of hunting dog types and example dogs of each type. So I moved the info from dog to hunting dog, making some really obvious gaps.

Would be great to have a 2-3 sentence summary of each grouping, nothing long and detailed at all, since there are separate articles for each type, but something that someone can read and get an idea of the differences among the types. Thought that might be something you'd be good at? Elf | Talk 03:54, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Nobility article

You asked (some time ago) for a rewrite of the article on Nobility. I have since rewritten large chunks of it, including many of the sentences that you highlighted as inadequate. You also pointed out that the article needed to distinguish between those characteristics which apply to all nobles and those which apply only in Western/European nations; I have created a new section on "non-Western nobility" to address this problem. As I feel that I have solved all the major problems with the article, I have deleted the rewrite bar. Please read the article, and feel free to tell me (on my talk page) if you don't like my changes. Walton monarchist89 15:17, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Dog breed names

Capitalization of breed names is a style rather than an absolute. Wikipedia style is indeed to capitalize the whole name. (Checking a few other pages is sometimes a good way to figure it out. :-) ). (My two favorite references, both encyclopedias of hundreds of dog breeds, capitalize, BTW. But the decision was actually made here before I started WPing.) Elf | Talk 01:31, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Really, I'm not here editing. I'm--uh--working on Release Notes for a 3-D graphics package. I have an alibi. I wasn't there. And I'm sticking to that story. Elf | Talk 01:46, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

P.S. TELL IT TO STOP RAINING!! ARGH! I'M TIRED OF THIS! IT'S BEEN RAINING ALL DAY! THIS IS CALIFORNIA AND IT'S ***SPRING*** D****IT!!!!!!! (Sorry, had to say it to SOMEone.) - me again

Tags on dog photos

I'm wondering about the tags on the dog photos you uploaded (Image:Kerygma Cockers Echo & Pheasant.JPG and Image:Kerygma Cockers Mistyside.jpg); text says "who released this photo to be used on Wikipedia" but they're flagged with public-domain tags. Did the creators release them into the public domain? Need to be specific about that and not that they think the photos will be used only on Wikipedia and nowhere else. Also, not sure that "PD-self" is valid in this case because you're not the creator of the works--possibly NoRightsReserved or {{PD-because | reason}} (where reason would be something like "permission given via email by xxx at www.yyy.com" or something similar) would be more appropriate? Elf | Talk 18:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I found another one that might be even better; read: Template talk:PD-release. (This stuff has changed so much in the last year or so--trying to find my way around the license templates is a --ahem--challenge.) Elf | Talk 22:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Upland hunting

I am not necessarilly suggesting that it is a problem that 'upland hunting' is a US term. My concern is that, because both terms are in common parlance, the less knowledgeable reader may expect upland hunting to be about hunting such as that which takes place in hilly areas. In the UK, for example, fox hunting in upland areas took a very different form to hunting in lowland areas. That said, if 'upland hunting' is the correct US term, of course it must be used, but with appropriate explanation. I know little about hunting in America. Do I deduce, from your helpful reference to UK rough shooting that 'upland hunting' does not include the UK 'driven shooting' where lines of (human) beaters flush the birds into the air to be shot? MikeHobday 06:23, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Sergeant Major

Since the military meaning is by far the most common, that should have stayed as the default, with a Sergeant Major (disambiguation) page created, as I have now done. As for adding "UK" after the RSM and CSM pages, the same applies - the UK/Commonwealth terms are by far the most common definitions of these terms and should be the default. Also please watch the use of spaces and capitalisation in your article titles. Thanks. -- Necrothesp 12:54, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

consolidating edits

thank you for the advice. I've been trying to do that as much as possible and hope to get better at it as I go. Any more advice, especially on the Harper's umbrella plant stub? Trilobitealive 22:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

What is POV?

I was interested in your comment at the League Against Cruel Sports talk page that "I submit that the proper recourse for a perceived POV selection of facts is not wholesale removal, but addition of those facts missing to bring the article to a NPOV status. Unfortunately, it seems that the quick and easy path was taken here and cited information was simply deleted". Personally I'm agnostic on that. It is interesting that this edit war coincided with a series of changes at working terrier where User:PBurns3711 took the opposite approach, namely to repeatedly revert a series of cited information. No wonder he has been blocked for breach of WP:3RR twice! Could I ask a favour? Perhaps you could look at the working terrier article and see if you believe that any of the deleted edits should be put back in? I have gernally been struck by your intelligent and rational approach to contentious issues and would be very grateful for your considered thoughts. For my part, I have given up being abused there. MikeHobday 21:38, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Will do. I happen to know who PBurns is though I do not know him personally. He is a noted authority in the terrier world and has spent a good deal of effort arguing against grossly unsportsmanlike hunter activity such as canned hunting. I do agree that a less confrontational approach would be more useful, however, and I will try to help out as I can.--Counsel 00:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Would appreciate that. The one edit he had allowed in to "his" article has now gone without explanation. Ironic given what he's written at [1]. By the way, User:Trilobitealive has left a message for you at [2], which I said I would pass on! MikeHobday 18:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Your recent comment

Thanks for your comment at [3]. I am pleased that you have looked through some of my edits. I try not to stray over the line I have drawn for myself, but the fact that I am overlooked occasionally gives me reassurance. MikeHobday 22:39, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

well I did not look through them all, I just looked back at the LACS article, and it looked kosher. I figured that there might be some conflicts of interest there NPOV vs. PR obligations. Given your somewhat high-profile position in an area of controversy, I think it is commendable that you use your own name.--Counsel 00:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Pot calling the kettle black at ANI

You may be interested in this. Keesiewonder ^talk 12:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Cougar

Please stop changing cougar to puma. The article is currently at that name, leave it there until the discussion completes. -Ravedave 03:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Hunting talk page comment

On July 17th you made the comment "The idea that wild populations are saved by the people who sour on hunting is silly. This is like saying that work on Coral Reefs will be done by vacationers in Florida rather than experienced divers." VERY nice analogy. I've read the page and have it on my watch list, I haven't gotten around to reading the talk page but just scanned through it and saw your comment and liked it, alot. Nice. Thanks for your time. --Xiahou 00:35, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Upland hunting

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Upland hunting, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://www.gunnersden.com/index.htm.shooting-hunting-upland.html, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Upland hunting and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Upland hunting with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Upland hunting.

It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at Talk:Upland hunting/Temp. Leave a note at Talk:Upland hunting saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! 76.25.45.21 (talk) 18:09, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I wrote the initial article. The other site copied it. Not sure if anything is to be done.--Counsel (talk) 23:01, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of The George Nethercutt Foundation

A tag has been placed on The George Nethercutt Foundation requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. ukexpat (talk) 16:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

see Talk:The George Nethercutt Foundation

I did not delete the article, I nominated it for deletion. It was deleted by an admin after review (in this case by User:Gwen Gale). Please address undelete requests to that user, or ask for a review at WP:DR. – ukexpat (talk) 17:42, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, deletion review is at WP:DRV. – ukexpat (talk) 17:45, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Constantian Society (2nd nomination)

Hi there! Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Constantian Society (2nd nomination) has just been relisted for a second time due to a lack of people offering an opinion. I listed Constantian Society for deletion after it was mentioned in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The George Nethercutt Foundation, which you commented on. It would be great if you could cast an eye over the Constantian Society article and deletion discussion, and offer an opinion, since it is in some ways a similar case. Cheers! --Stormie (talk) 00:04, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Kerygma Cockers Mistyside.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Kerygma Cockers Mistyside.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 10:23, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Merger Proposed between WikiProject Eastern Washington and WikiProject Washington

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Washington at 04:05, 24 December 2010 (UTC).

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

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

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

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

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

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

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

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