User talk:TKD/Archive 13
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:TKD. 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. |
| Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
WP:MACHINIMA
Hey, long time no see!
We certainly need new blood in WP:MACHINIMA. My efforts over the last year have mainly been the odd revert or AFD of blatantly nonnotable productions, or maintaining the status quo of existing articles. The core problem is that of course 99.9% of machinima isn't notable, leaving us with little to work on other than the improvement of existing articles. I agree that merging into WP:VG may be the easiest way to get people involved, but I do fear the possibility of lowering of standards on what gets to be made into articles, be it due to the parent project's nature, or the potential involvement of those who have vested interest in certain productions. I could be completely wrong though, as I've barely read WP:VG and its subpages.
As for improving existing articles, unfortunately I'm still just as bad a procrastinator as before, if not more so. I have bit of a short attention span at times, and sometimes forget about a task I intend to do for months. Case in point, I volunteered to take the shears to the RvB page on Wikiquote, which had gotten to over 340K, but haven't laid a finger on it in over three months. I want to watch through all the DVDs again to refresh my memory and better decide what stays and what goes from the page, but I've been tardy on that front, having only watched through Season 1 so far. Still, I suppose it will give me an excuse to also listen through the commentary again and garner info to improve the general RvB articles. I actually took down some notes from the seasons 1-3 and Strangerhood commentaries close enough to two years ago, then forgot all about them.
By the way, what did you think of RvB:Reconstruction? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drat (talk • contribs) 08:28, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
- TKD- Yes, I saw your response, but had started to shift from clean up/administrive mode to article writing mode. Thank you for the reminder though. I've got an article at WP:GAN and one almost ready for WP:FAC, so if it's alright I'll try to give the Project clean up a nudge next week. As far as the categories go, that's something I never thought about. I certainly see the merit of keeping them, and I will bring the topic up when things get going. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:36, 9 February 2009 (UTC))
Blu-Ray.com
Blu-ray.com is not an official site, believe me, I know. They have no affiliation to the BDA nor do the two Swedes who own it even have a clue about how the industry works. From the site itself:
"This web site is not affiliated with the Blu-ray Disc Association. All trademarks are the property of the respective trademark owners."
Please stop attempting to endow them with official status. The staff their are so far outside the CE and movie industry, it's unbelievable.
Locution (talk) 19:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
The official source would of course be the BDA, but information from them outside of a .pdf white paper is hard to come by. Even then, it's nearly impossible trying to find the actual mandatory codecs, etc. anywhere on their official sites, the U.S. site being blu-raydisc.com. I've added refs to InterBluray.co.uk that list it all on one page, and in simpler language than Blu-ray.com. :-)
I do have the BD white papers, but most of the ones available online are outdated, for some reason. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Locution (talk • contribs) 20:03, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 31, 2009
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 5 | 31 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 22:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
User:Bullfish111
It would appear that Bullfish111 and 80.44.254.152, who both voted in the War of the Servers AFD, are one and the same: 80.44.254.152 signed Bullfish111's message in the AFD he created.--Drat (Talk) 15:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
The WPVG Newsletter (January 2009)
| The WikiProject Video games Newsletter | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||
- Newsletter delivery by xenobot 00:23, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Machinima festivals
Yes, creating a list of machinima festivals seems to be the best way to go. AMAS festivals can always be split off later if the article gets big, yet they still dominate it.--Drat (Talk) 11:26, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Userpage
Thanks for the advice. I'll revise the section some time. Most of the additions to the page were written ages ago; I only recently dug up the files and put them together, so I guess it was inevitable something was out of date or based on my older interpretations of policies.--Drat (Talk) 06:37, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
CSD Copyright Question
Hi,
I'm not quite sure where to ask this, but as I see you handle CSD a lot, I thought I would give you a try. On new page patrol tonight, I came across user:CCFSDCA, who is adding articles such as Africa Industrialization Day, Garifuna settlement day, and Ceremonie-yam. In these articles are statements such as "Original text from The Whole World Calendar Book of Holidays Around the World by Christopher Corbett-Fiacco, by permission of author.)" The author was advised on his talk page that in order to be able to do this, the work must be donated to Wikipedia.[1]. Judging from the user's username and another article he wrote, I am guessing that he is the author of this book, however I would like to know what the appropriate response should be in this situation; specifically, 1) is there a way to verify that the book has been donated, and 2) if it has not, should these articles be tagged for speedy deletion (G12)?
Sorry if you're the wrong person to ask... if this is the case, I would really appreciate it if you could point me in the right direction. Thanks! --Aka042 (talk) 19:51, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- PS you can reply on my talk page if you'd like, despite my talkback template! --Aka042 (talk) 19:52, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'll reply here, since that is your default preference. CSD G12 applies only to cases of blatant copyright infringement, where there is no credible claim of permission. Given what you suggested, it sounds as if the editor may in fact be legally able and willing to release his work, so in my judgment G12 doesn't apply. However, the important thing is that he needs to explicitly release it under the GFDL, not merely under vague "permission" terms; thus, it's still an issue. I would:
- follow the instructions under the second box of WP:CV#Instructions, where the use of {{subst:copyvio}} (not {{db-copyvio}}) and a listing under WP:CV is recommended; and
- request the editor to follow the instructions at WP:IOWN and email the OTRS team as a written record of proper licensing under the GFDL. When/if this happens, an OTRS volunteer will lift the copyvio notice. If this doesn't occur, the page will eventually be deleted through normal non-speedy copyvio processing.
- I'm at work at the moment, so I can't immediately follow through myself. — TKD::Talk 20:15, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Looks like he's attracted a bit of attention from others, too. And they're right about this being an WP:ADVERT problem, if in fact the book exists. I was merely commenting on the copyright issue, but apparently no one can find info about the book, anyway. It looks as if he's stopped claiming that the text of his articles is "quoted" from his book and instead merely "citing" it. Even though we have no way of verifying this at all, it's probably not worth pursuing as a copyvio, since we can't seem to tell whether the material exists at all in the first place. In fact, I suggest rendering the point moot by trying to find suitable redirect targets for his stubs. I did one for Poinsettia day, for example. — TKD::Talk 01:03, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hey, thanks for the reply and sorry for the delay in response. I noticed the issue was brought up on the administrator's noticeboard and it seems like others have taken care of the issue (finding references and speedily deleting the ones where no references could be found). --Aka042 (talk) 22:17, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Correction.. looks like most have been turned into redirects as you suggested. thanks again. --Aka042 (talk) 22:23, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Looks like he's attracted a bit of attention from others, too. And they're right about this being an WP:ADVERT problem, if in fact the book exists. I was merely commenting on the copyright issue, but apparently no one can find info about the book, anyway. It looks as if he's stopped claiming that the text of his articles is "quoted" from his book and instead merely "citing" it. Even though we have no way of verifying this at all, it's probably not worth pursuing as a copyvio, since we can't seem to tell whether the material exists at all in the first place. In fact, I suggest rendering the point moot by trying to find suitable redirect targets for his stubs. I did one for Poinsettia day, for example. — TKD::Talk 01:03, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you
thank you so much for your assistance on User:Ikip/AfD. Hope to see you again soon! Have a great weekend. Ikip (talk) 21:39, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Hartford Meetup: We need your help!
The next Connecticut Wikipedia meetup will take place sometime during April 2009 at Real Art Ways cafe and arts center in Hartford, Connecticut. Please list on the meetup page whether or not you can go. Also please contribute ideas for topics and dates! Hope to see you there!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
A Request, please
Would you mind deleting the page KAAI (currently a stand alone redirect) so that I may move 98.5 The Stream to it's correct call sign location as requested by a recently close AfD? I would appreciate it. - NeutralHomer • Talk • February 9, 2009 @ 06:13
- Many thanks :) Take Care...NeutralHomer • Talk • February 9, 2009 @ 06:20
Thanks a lot for helping me out. I was beginning to get worried. Huntthetroll (talk) 07:59, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi there; am I missing something? you blocked this IP for 31 hours, when as far as I can see he did not vandalise after final warning. If I have missed something please do not hesitate to tell me; this is how we learn. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 22:18, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, February 8, 2009
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 6 | 8 February 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| News and notes: Elections, licensing update, and more | Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's future, WikiDashboard, and "wiki-snobs" |
| Dispatches: April Fools 2009 mainpage | WikiProject Report: WikiProject Music |
| Features and admins | The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Spider-Man
Hello. :) Since you have been involved in editing the article Spider-Man, I wanted to let you know that we have nominated the article for "Good Article" status. You can view the review page, and if there is anything you can do to make the article better, please do so. :) There are a number of concerns to be addressed and some work to be done, so pitch in if you are able, make any suggestions that you think might be helpful, or at least just be there for moral support. :) BOZ (talk) 01:15, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — February 16, 2009
If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 07:57, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Rolback
That'll be really handy, thanks! Sorry for the late reply, I've been a little busy, and you know my capacity for forgetting things.--Drat (Talk) 07:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Connecticut Meetup: You are invited!
The 2nd Connecticute Meetup will take place on April 18th, 2009 at Real Art Ways cafe and arts center in Hartford, Connecticut. Please state whether or not you can attend on the meetup page.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) because your name was on the invite list. 16:40, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
DYK for The French Democracy
|
On February 23, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The French Democracy, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Wikipedia Signpost — February 23, 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:
- Philosophers analyze Wikipedia as a knowledge source
- An automated article monitoring system for WikiProjects
- News and notes: Wikimania, usability, picture contest, milestones
- Wikipedia in the news: Lessons for Brits, patent citations
- Dispatches: Hundredth Featured sound approaches
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Islam
- Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:18, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
RPP on Laveranues Coles
Thanks for getting the protection up so fast on that one. And thanks for getting the IPA fixed while you were at it! Gnowor (talk) 23:28, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:
- Books extension enabled
- News and notes: Stewards, Wikimania bids, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's role in journalism, Smarter Wikipedia, Skittles
- Dispatches: WikiProject Ships Featured topic and Good topics
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Norse History and Culture
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
The WPVG Newsletter (February 2009)
| The WikiProject Video games Newsletter | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||||||||
- Newsletter delivery by xenobot 00:27, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:
- News and notes: Commons, conferences, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Politics, more politics, and more
- Dispatches: 100 Featured sounds milestone
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Christianity
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 01:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Halowars:
Sorry about the source. New to this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragonexadon (talk • contribs) 18:20, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Office Assistant
May I know under which WP policy/guidelines was the Office assistant in popular culture section removed? A very large number of WP articles on diverse topics have "In popular culture" sections. :-) - xpclient Talk 14:06, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — 16 March 2009
— 16 March 2009- News and notes: License update, Commons cartoons, films milestone, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Manufactured scandal, Wikipedia assignments, and more
- Dispatches: New FAC and FAR appointments
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 00:12, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for File:Male Restroom Etiquette no adjacent urinals.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Male Restroom Etiquette no adjacent urinals.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 06:03, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
- Note: Bot was wrong. — TKD::{talk} 06:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Structure of machinima
No problem! By the way, I am actually working on that readthrough of the machinima article, and making changes and notes offline, but then I installed a bunch of games and got distracted. I'll try to get back to it.--Drat (Talk) 10:08, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
CfD nomination of Category:Machinima productions
I have nominated Category:Machinima productions (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:Machinima works (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. — TKD::{talk} 10:10, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for your action regarding 90.148.44.110 (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 15:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
: 23 March 2009
- From the editor: Reviewing books for the Signpost
- Special report: Abuse Filter is enabled
- News and notes: Flaggedrevs, copyright project, fundraising reports, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Alternatives, IWF threats, and more
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:43, 24 March 2009 (UTC)