This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

{{ helpme}} I'm not too good yet at being bold on Wikipedia's behalf, and suspect that I may have a situation calling for just that. I'd be grateful for any help or advice.

John Cook School of Business reads like a promotional brochure for the school: "our graduate business programs will give you a competitive edge", "many options help you find your niche", etc. The only ref provided is an external link to the school web-site. A little searching quickly disclosed that much of the language was taken directly from that location. Ha! A pretty direct copyright infraction! Well, not exactly. Down at the bottom of the Wikipedia article is "Copyright (c) 2007, St. Louis University", with permission granted to copy, etc. via GNU Free Documentation License.

What I have done, so far, is to put a {{advert|article}} tag at the top of the article, and a commentary in the discussion page about the inadequacies of the article, while indicating that the copyright claim is inappropriate. I have a hunch that something more is needed. What do you suggest? Tim Ross· ^talk 17:44, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Give being bold a go! Try to re-write the article from a neutral point of view. It does not matter if much of the content is lost, a decent stub is better than a large advert. Drop me a note if I can be of assistance - you have been doing good work so far :) Tiddly- Tom 18:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject University of Florida, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of University of Florida. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks!

Jccort (
talk) 03:08, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I apoligize, I thought san jose, CA was a suburb, because it has a high income level. Anyway, I apoligize.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dwilso ( talk • contribs) 02:46, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Tim...thanks for the input!! FieldMarine ( talk) 19:51, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject Florida State University, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Florida State University. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks! Addbot ( talk) 19:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Jccort (
talk) 19:58, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I saw your name at Wikipedia:Photo_Matching_Service#Florida. I revised Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Florida to make it easier for photographers in Florida to locate requests. Please consider adding your name at Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Bay County, Florida and monitoring requests at Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Florida for each Florida county in which you take photos. Thanks. GregManninLB ( talk) 07:08, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I saw your name at Wikipedia:Photo Matching Service. Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Georgia (U.S. state) has been subcategorized by county. Please consider monitoring and adding your name to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Thomas County, Georgia and to any other Georgia county where you typically take photographs. Thanks. GregManninLB ( talk) 19:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, you are welcome! The picture you provided me is small so I am unsure of the trainer's name - either Dave or Eric. However, the trainer is doing a nose or rostrum stand on Kayla. Since I can barely make out the trainer in the picture, I would state the picture caption as follows: A trainer demonstrating a rostrum stand on top of Kayla during the Believe show at SeaWorld Orlando. I hope that helps! If you need any more captions, then please let me know! I am an expert when it comes to my babies (orcas)! SWF Trainer ( talk) 14:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for answering my question, Nancy, about the Tim Cantor article. Upon looking through the article's history, I found that you have put in a good deal of work improving it. Do you think there is a reasonable chance of coming up with some legitimate references that document notability? I was unable to locate anything, myself (via a few Google searches), that provided much of use. If you aren't aware of anything more, it would seem appropriate to me to put it up for deletion. I assume you disagree, and would appreciate hearing your views. Tim Ross (talk) 13:30, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually I completely agree with you! I got involved in the first place trying to help a newbie out as the article was chock full of TCs pictures which had been uploaded under GFDL and I was pretty sure that the uploader a) didn't have the rights to do that and b) didn't understand the implications - I was right on both counts. I did spend an bit of time de-spamming and copyediting but left it tagged as being primary sourced and was hoping that the original author would step back in and reference it properly as in truth I am not interested enough in the subject to make a great deal of effort. As it stands at the moment I would in all probability !vote delete at AFD on the grounds of notability and lack of reliable sources. Kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 13:56, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I guess the ball is in my court, Nancy. I've never initiated an AFD before, although I've commented on quite a few. I would like to be able to offer some sort of link or citation showing that "The Art of Tim Cantor" is published by the article's subject and that the primary author of the article is an employee. Can you suggest a good way to do that? Tim Ross (talk) 13:51, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Tim, this diff shows that the author works at Tim Cantor's gallery and this link shows that the book is published by Ashby and Alfred which according to both the website and the Tim Cantor article is owned by TC. Big tip for creating AFDs is to remember to transclude the discussion on to the list for 'today' (I've forgotten to do that bit before now!). If you need help with the process then the instructions are here - or of course give me a shout & I would be happy to help. Good luck! Kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 14:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Exactly what I needed. Thank you very much! This procedure looks more complex, to do right, than I had expected. I'll play around with it in my sandbox for a while - maybe a couple of days, even - and when I have what I think might be acceptable, I'll ask you to take a look. Tim Ross (talk) 14:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Nancy, I'd be grateful if you would take a look at this draft for an AFD. It went faster than I expected. Many thanks. Tim Ross (talk) 16:01, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Gosh I wish all AFD noms were as thorough as this - it's great. You give sound policy based reasons why it should be deleted and also demonstrate that you have made every effort to try and find evidence of TC's notability. nancy ^(talk) 17:30, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Very embarrassing! I just attempted to set up the AFD page and clearly did something wrong. When I completed the third step of the process, adding the AFD to the log page it seemed to work fine. However, when I look at the resultant Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2008 April 26, it only exists as a red-lined entry, between "Ettore Musolino" and "Rick Bartow". I'll keep working on it to see if I can find where I went wrong, but please jump in if you have a chance. Tim Ross (talk) 10:55, 26 April 2008 (UTC) Cancel the help reguest, Nancy. I'm still not sure what I did wrong, but I managed to move the code around enough to get it working (to my eye, at least). Please take a look, though, when it's convenient, to see if there are still any problems with the nomination. Many thanks. Tim Ross (talk) 11:13, 26 April 2008 (UTC) Woops! Now I see a problem (that I can live with for a while). I've somehow lost the category for the AFD, which should be "Biographical", and can't figure out how to get it back. Much obliged for any help. Tim Ross (talk) 11:22, 26 April 2008 (UTC) Very sorry to take up so much space here! I think I have the category fixed, now, too. Just need to send out a notice or two. Many, many thanks. Tim Ross (talk) 11:30, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Tim, sorry for not being around yesterday when you posted the AFD although you managed to sort out the little problems just fine without me. I added my twopenn'th to it earlier this afternoon as you may have seen already. Kind regards, nancy ^(talk) 16:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Tim, thanks for the reply. Hmm, if you could supply me with the details I'd be grateful. The woman in the picture is considerably older, wider in girth and has different facial features to Louise. The way the photo has been organised would suggest a married couple, and therefore I believe that this photo is of Boehm and his wife, Frances Boteler, who died in 1890. Clarification would be helpful. :) Thanks, PeterSymonds | talk 21:32, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Sent response via e-mail. Tim Ross (talk) 11:26, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi there :-)

your revert was ok to the point were it says "false killer whale". but maybe we can rename http://www.woai.com/mostpopular/story.aspx?content_id=e9fdad0c-5dcf-407a-a1b7-48c953e7ef2a Sea World Killer Whale Diesto Orca as well as Sea World trainer in fair condition after killer whale attack to Orca. how's that? i always thought that "killer whale" is ummm...a lil' "inappropriate". it always sounds as if those animals would be very aggressive. i agree that we could take both...but i suggest we take "orca" because it doesn't give our readers the impression of a extremely aggressive animal. kind reagrds SomeUsr |  Talk  Contribs 14:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, SomeUsr. That's a really tricky point, and I'm afraid I don't really have a good answer, just some preferences.

One basic issue is that "orca" was a relatively little-used word until quite recently, I believe - say since the emergence of "Shamu" as a cultural icon. To my knowledge, earlier literature overwhelmingly uses "killer whale". (Perhaps the driving force behind the change has been from commercial interests, but I have no knowledge of that.) I suspect, in fact, that many people don't realize that the two terms refer to the same animal. For that reason, I would think it best to try to use both terms, at least once, in any article in which they play an important part.

You are correct, of course, that "killer whale" sounds like a large, dangerous predator. The SeaWord shows make it clear that they are very intelligent, interesting, trainable animals, capable of close relationships with people. The fierce-sounding name, though, is not always entirely inappropriate.

I would suggest that we let article originators choose the main common name to use, but make certain that the other name is also present in the article if possible. It might cause some confusion if one tried to remove "killer whale" from Wikipedia. Tim Ross (talk) 14:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

you've got some valid points here. hm...ok, i agree with you that we should use both terms and let the original creator decide if he/she wants to change it. i'm fine with that. kind regards SomeUsr |  Talk  Contribs 15:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

• As you may seen from my previous contributions, I am a huge proponent of Colleges and Universities in Florida. I have gone to great lengths to create alumni lists for the entire State University System of Florida and the Independent Colleges and Universities of Florida. I am particularly proud of the FSU alumni list because they have SO MANY FSU Alumni who have not been documented on Wikipedia. The majority of people who do not have articles created, could easily pass the Wikipedia standards for notability. I therefore question your motivation for wanting to do a mass purge of the Alumni who do not have articles created on Wikipedia. I will now post this debate on the Official Wikipedia Project FSU, so that we debate in a Democratic fashion how to handle the overall article. Jccort ( talk) 17:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading Image:AdventureCFast.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI ( talk) 15:58, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Claim adjusted to include name of article to which it applies. Tag removed. Tim Ross (talk) 16:25, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

{{helpme}}I would be grateful if someone would help me out with the tables in List of Florida State University people. There are a lot of them, with or without a few illustration to the right, and each is a different size from the others, causing the page to look a bit sloppy. The obvious answer was to use fixed width columns. I, thus, tried beginning each table with code like this:

{| class="wikitable"
|-
| width="150pt"|Athlete
| width="550pt"|Notability
|-

The tables changed when I did that, but not all the same way! I'm obviously out of my depth, and some advice would really be great. Thanks. Tim Ross (talk) 19:24, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

• Try asking at Help talk:Table. I don't know what you did wrong either. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps)} 19:57, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

That may do the trick. I'll see what happens there. Thanks, TenPoundHammer. Tim Ross (talk) 10:24, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Tim, I've posted a further suggestion at Fixed column widths need fixing?; hope it helps. -- Error -128 ( talk) 08:19, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

If you could create stubs for them, that'd be good enough. I tend to remove any redlink names under "Notable residents" for any city/town. I know I'm not the only one that does. If they're notable, they should have a Wiki article, right? That section tends to be a vandal magnet, so having at least a stub article to be included on that list has always seemed like a good idea.

Anyhoo, you do good work, so keep it up. And if you get a chance to take more photos of historic Leon County, it'd be really neat-o. :) -- Ebyabe ( talk) 23:43, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi,

I'm posting this message because you're listed as a participant in WikiProject Geology. I've set up a task force aiming to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the Cambrian explosion, and I was wondering whether you may be interested in helping out? If you would like to help in any way, you could cast an eye over the task force page and see if there are any articles or tasks that take your fancy! Any contributions would be greatly appreciated.

Best wishes,

Smith609  Talk 15:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I believe that information came from the Graybills in Washington State. I used to have an audio interview from when I called them, but I don't think I saved it. They helped with the family genealogy, which I was still trying to work out for the article, they helped with the death years and where people are buried for findagrave. -- Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) ( talk) 14:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I noticed this edit. I see what you're doing, and I do appreciate editors correcting spelling errors. But this particular one isn't an error. Nerve-wracking and nerve-racking are both standard spellings. Ntsimp ( talk) 19:57, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

You are, of course, quite right, Ntsimp. Several sources now accept the spelling nerve-wracking in addition to the conventional nerve-racking. (Although some don't, as well. See, for example, Bill Bryson's 2002 Bryson's Dictionary of Troublesome Words.) The etymological discordance of this alternate pains me, but I will refrain from changing the phrase. Thanks for the advice. Tim Ross (talk) 20:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

moved discussion to the page for the article to respond -- 83d40m ( talk) 23:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Tim, howzit going? Thanks for the note & I apologize for not responding earlier, but I've been away on military duty & only performing light maintenance lately. Anyway, great work on cleaning up the List of museums in Florida & I left a comment there about proposed formatting changes. Thanks! FieldMarine ( talk) 03:40, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Dear Sir,

While I appreciate your work to keep Wikipedia accurate and relevant, I am a bit confused about your decision to twice remove the cultural reference in the Victor Emmanuel article. You will note that many Wikipedia articles on historical figures, events, and places include a section on cultural references---as such this is not in any way inappropriate. Furthermore, your statement that you do not know such a drink even exists and therefore it should not be included seems rather egocentric. The drink is served at a popular clubhouse bar in Baltimore; certainly as a Floridian (and evidently not a member of the L'Hirondelle Club in Maryland) you cannot be expected to be aware of the drink. I am not sure what you would have me cite in order to prove this to you, but just because you happen to suspect something is nonexistent does not make it so.

Please allow the following recipe to suffice: 1.5 oz. Gin, .5 oz. Blue Curacao, .5 oz. Limoncello, juice of one orange. Shake ingredients with ice and strain into a martini glass. Serve with a twist of lemon.

Thank you for your time, and I hope that this can be resolved.

Remclaecsec ( talk) 17:53, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Remclaecsec, you are, I suspect, new to Wikipedia, so I will try to answer your questions in some detail. First, you may wish to refer to WP:OR. It seems likely, based on what you have said, that the material in question, in the Victor Emmanuel article, is based on personal knowledge. This is not how encyclopedias are developed or written. Instead, they are based on reliable information made publicly available, usually as information published in one form or another. (Also, see WP:V.) If you can find such a published source for the drink to which you refer, and cite it in your statement, that will go a long way towards making the addition more acceptable in the article. The mention of two otherwise unknown individuals (from the point-of-view of Wikipedia) without published support, further detracts from the statement.

You are correct, that cultural references are sometimes included in various Wikipedia articles. This does not mean, though, that any appearance of an article topic in popular culture is proper or appropriate for a Wikipedia article. If Victor Emmanuel were the subject of a fictionalized television series or an animated movie, no one would argue with a mention of the fact. If "a Victor Emmanuel" meant some specific and well-known gymnastic move, that too would be worth recording. If a drink is named after him at a single drinking establishment, the fact is of negligible consequence, and, in Wikipedia terms, is not notable.

I hope this helps you to understand the deletion of the cultural reference. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Tim Ross (talk) 20:37, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

No problem. KnightLago ( talk) 03:05, 21 July 2008 (UTC)