DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.
This archive page covers approximately the dates between 1 January 2007 and ?.
Post replies to the main talk page, copying the section you are replying to if necessary. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.)
Being less WP active in the last couple of months, I find myself entering through the Main Page (rather than my browser's bookmarks) more frequently and, whenever I do so, I continue to be impressed with the overall presentation of our "front page". Thanks for your perseverance, intellect and gentle (sometimes) persuasion during those times of change. A very merry New Year to you and to those that are close. -- hydnjo talk 21:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Yeah that would be great
I was doing a lot of juggling with the text, wishing that I had done exactly what you suggested, and I had that beginning of '07 on my clipboard so I just dropped it in the archive. It should go in the next archive though, so yeah move it -- froth T C 03:18, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Looks like an odd reference to Klaatu barada nikto. I've noticed you haven't commented on the drama at the Monty Hall FAR. Is the article looking better? -- Rick Block ( talk) 22:19, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm very glad you liked that quote :D. I've always liked encyclopedias very much, but after a (long) while I generally had already read my particular areas of interest. This thing clearly does not happen with Wikipedia :) I think that due to its nature it is the only encyclopedia project actually deserving its name. -- Taraborn 22:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
I saw your comment in the Terri Schiavo archives questioning linking of dates. Yea - I agree. It seems bizarre to me. If they want to do it, or not do it, they could have a BOT take care of it, either way. But why you would want to link all dates is beyond me.
I think that there is excessive and inane wiki linking across the board.
Martin | tk 06:53, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Being less WP active in the last couple of months, I find myself entering through the Main Page (rather than my browser's bookmarks) more frequently and, whenever I do so, I continue to be impressed with the overall presentation of our "front page". Thanks for your perseverance, intellect and gentle (sometimes) persuasion during those times of change. A very merry New Year to you and to those that are close. -- hydnjo talk 21:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Yeah that would be great
I was doing a lot of juggling with the text, wishing that I had done exactly what you suggested, and I had that beginning of '07 on my clipboard so I just dropped it in the archive. It should go in the next archive though, so yeah move it -- froth T C 03:18, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Looks like an odd reference to Klaatu barada nikto. I've noticed you haven't commented on the drama at the Monty Hall FAR. Is the article looking better? -- Rick Block ( talk) 22:19, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm very glad you liked that quote :D. I've always liked encyclopedias very much, but after a (long) while I generally had already read my particular areas of interest. This thing clearly does not happen with Wikipedia :) I think that due to its nature it is the only encyclopedia project actually deserving its name. -- Taraborn 22:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
I saw your comment in the Terri Schiavo archives questioning linking of dates. Yea - I agree. It seems bizarre to me. If they want to do it, or not do it, they could have a BOT take care of it, either way. But why you would want to link all dates is beyond me.
I think that there is excessive and inane wiki linking across the board.
Martin | tk 06:53, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
...to see the Caballero of c.s. has returned back to the RD. I hope your break was a happy one. wb! --- Sluzzelin 03:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
I've posted a question at each RD just to observe the response time and quality. Please forgive me if this was a stupid thing to do, it was just my own personal experiment and it was not frivolous (I think). -- hydnjo talk 02:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
If this is my username, imagine what my password must be like. It's not a password - it's not, er, random enough. x42bn6 Talk 16:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
I found your timing of the answers for questions at the Ref Desks interesting. Especially considering I have one on the Science Desk that's been there a few days without an answer. Dismas| (talk) 05:36, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi - Don't know if you noticed, but I've done some work on the by year FA nomination lists (like Wikipedia:Featured articles nominated in 2007). They are now up to date with respect to FA vs. FFA (FFAs are in strikethrough font) and mainpage date. I wrote a script that generates lists like Wikipedia:Today's featured article/2004/List by date (from the TFA archives). I haven't done the TFA lists for the other years yet (although this is trivial). In any event, thought you might be interested. -- Rick Block ( talk) 01:56, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Adambrowne666 ACTION FIGURE.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Image-Adambrowne666 ACTION FIGURE.jpg. The copy called Image:Image-Adambrowne666 ACTION FIGURE.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.
This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and remember exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 05:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Would you care to take a look at my talk page? I have an idea for the reference desk and I would like to know what you think about it. Also, if you understand about bots, your opinion would be really useful. A.Z. 02:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Now I moved it to the reference desk talk page. A.Z. 03:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
You are the people that I have the hardest time understanding here. Sorry, I didn't make myself clear enough. It has to do with slangs and with that last post of yours. I read it a couple of times and I couldn't figure out just what it meant. I like you, though. A.Z. 04:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Very funny, enjoyed it! Adambrowne666 07:30, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Removed link to personal blog "Today's Worst Wikipedian in the World " which does not aid in creation or add to the betterment of the encylopedia. "Links or references to off-site personal attacks against Wikipedians should be removed. The removal of such material is not subject to the three-revert rule. Linking to attack sites is not permitted and doing so repeatedly may result in a block." See WP:NPA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uncle uncle uncle ( talk • contribs)
I agree that it is usually not a done thing to edit other people's user page without their permission.
But, (isn't there always a but) I didn't want to create any fuss.
I left the text unchanged, it continued to say: "For more righteous indignation, see my blog", I removed only the offending link.
I see a user linking to their own blog on which they select "Today's Worst Wikipedian in the World" and go on to name one as violating the word and intent of the Wikipedia policies against harassing another user.
Such a link has no place in an encylopedia and does nothing to forward the purpose of "creating and distributing a multilingual free encyclopedia of the highest quality to every single person on the planet in their own language"
I'll do as you've suggested however. Uncle uncle uncle 21:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
I'd miss you too much! You will find an explanation on my talk page, Hydnjo. Love Clio the Muse 00:07, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:CfG SamBrown.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
{{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Garion96 (talk) 23:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:Wikipedia Bookmark.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 for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi Hydnjo!
As you may remember,you have an account in our bank User:Bank_of_Wikipedia (or the renamed User:BoW_Bank). Our bank has been destroyed here and all our work and records have been deleted, because they accused us of being a role account. We have tried to revive the bank in wikia, but they rejected us again. If you are still interested in our Bank and in your account there (as I am) I would like you to join wikia and support our request for the creation of the bank.
yours BankOfWikia 10:10, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I happened upon this user's talk - shouldn't it also go away? ~ hydnjo talk 18:24, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
No reason you can't contest the prod -- all you have to do is post something more than "this is a company that makes medical equipment." The article is actually empty enough to be eligible for speedy deletion, but I held off after seeing your (good) contribution history. I still don't understand why people have to post these "placeholder" articles -- it's not like there's some other Puritan Bennett that's going to swoop in and grab the article title. Wait until you have a good basic article stub and then post it. NawlinWiki 23:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading Image:DSCN0300.JPG. 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 02:25, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
A few templates you created,
Template:Main pagedate and
Template:Main page date, have been marked for deletion as deprecated and orphaned templates. If, after 14 days, there have been no objections, the templates will be deleted. If you wish to object to their deletion, please list your objections
here and feel free to remove the {{
deprecated}}
tag from the templates. If you feel the deletions are appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. --
MZMcBride 02:48, 13 August 2007 (UTC)