User talk:Nhprman

Nhprman's Talk Page

If you leave a message for me here, I'll respond here, unless asked to respond on your Talk page, which I will cheerfully do!

Orwellian

"Quite apart from the suppression of definitely heretical words, reduction of vocabulary was regarded as an end in itself, and no word that could be dispensed with was allowed to survive. Newspeak was designed not to extend but to diminish the range of thought, and this purpose was indirectly assisted by cutting the choice of words down to a minimum." - George Orwell's description of Newspeak in 1984 and the goal of Wikipedia's Iconoclastic, Reductionist and Deletionist Jihadists. I will leave them to it.

This user is a member of WikiProject New Hampshire, which seeks to expand information about the state. Please feel free to join us.

Comment invited

As an occasional past editor at Template:United States presidential election, 2008,
your comment is invited at Template talk:United States presidential election, 2008#Revisited: Proposal on minimum standards for listing on template
-- Yellowdesk (talk) 18:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the invitation. I've been watching this page and have contributed to the discussion. - Nhprman 19:08, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Thslogo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Thslogo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As usual, the previous fair use template, noting that this was a low-resolution image used for purely illustrative purposes, was completely sufficient under all existing law regarding fair use. That is, until the Deletionists created this fearsome monster called "non-free" and decided to denude Wikipedia of all images. Again, knock yourselves out, you sad, pathetic little dictators. LOL - Nhprman 04:31, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Holyfamilyacadlogo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Holyfamilyacadlogo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:55, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have added fair use rationale required under WP:RAT. User:BetacommandBot's edits throughout WP has provoked universal condemnation and the bot has been blocked several times by admins who are shocked by its hundreds of thousands of random, often incorrect edits. - Nhprman 04:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:JSRHSseal.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:JSRHSseal.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have added fair use rationale required under WP:RAT. User:BetacommandBot's edits throughout WP has provoked universal condemnation and the bot has been blocked several times by admins who are shocked by its hundreds of thousands of random, often incorrect edits. - Nhprman 04:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template discussion

As an occasional editor to the discussion at Template:United States presidential election, 2008 your input would be appreciated at Template talk:United States presidential election, 2008#Proposal: A return to the old standards. Thank you.--S TX 04:37, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I feel less lonely

Is there a fellowship of contributors tired of zealous delitionists ? At least, since I read your comments about BetacommandBot, I feel less lonely. Baronnet (talk) 23:47, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS : may I use (and maybe adapt) the Orwellian box ? Baronnet (talk) 23:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is wonderful to hear from another, too! Thank you for your kind words. ;-) Yes, by all means adapt the box. I adapted it from elsewhere, myself. - Nhprman 02:32, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

John Taylor Bowles

Under the now-current standards at Template:United States presidential election, 2008, with approximate agreement on zero dollar reported FEC activity threshold, it appears this person qualifies for listing on the template (though I won't be adding him). -- Yellowdesk (talk) 20:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orwell box

You need not call delitionists other names. That's descriptive enough. Jihadist is inflamatory. -- Yellowdesk (talk) 21:16, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I only used it because "Crusader" is somehow not quite politically correct, though works just as well. Seriously, when someone makes it a point to delete EVERY IMAGE from Wikipedia, and sets up a Bot to do the job, "philosophically inclined towards deleting stuff" (i.e. "Deletionist") doesn't seem to state the case strong enough. But point taken. Rhetorical barbs only go so far, esp. here, where those who oppose expanding knowledge are so numerous, and 'efficient' at stifling the debate. What's the point in fighting it so hard? seems to be my mood, for the most part. - Nhprman 04:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can appreciate the frustration, and admit I have not met up with the sort you apparently have. Cheers, Yellowdesk (talk) 04:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lucky you. Then again, I'm sure you must have heard of Betacommandbot. He/it is a great example of that sort. - Nhprman 14:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider taking the AGF Challenge

I would like to invite you to consider taking part in the AGF Challenge which has been proposed for use in the RfA process [1] by User: Kim Bruning. You can answer in multiple choice format, or using essay answers, or anonymously. You can of course skip any parts of the Challenge you find objectionable or inadvisable.--Filll (talk) 15:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Frankguinta.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Frankguinta.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 21:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Josh Logan

I have nominated Josh Logan, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Josh Logan (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 22:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Logan

I still don't see how he meets WP:MUSIC. Just placing in a reality tv series isn't a criterion of WP:MUSIC, and I don't really see any reliable sources, outside trivial coverage related to the tv series. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 23:13, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know this is going to be an unsatisfactory answer, but he gets plenty of LOCAL coverage, though I will freely admit that he's not a superstar, and I bet he would, too. Then again, does WP require superstar status for "notability"? Someone "of note" means that they are known, to an extent. But does it mean universal know-ability? I think there's a grey area here that requires perhaps a bit of wisdom and the occasional exception to rigidity. As I said, perhaps too vociferously, there's an intepretation of the Notability guidelines here that are a bit too stringent, rigid and legalistic. Mr. Logan is not famous, important or necessarily 'popular.' But then again the WP:N guidelines state that "Notability is distinct from fame, importance, or popularity," - Nhprman 04:12, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of British towns with no railway station

This has been nominated for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of British towns with no railway station. Simply south...... flapping wings into buildings for just 6 years 12:38, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to F.W.P. Greenwood may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

He preached his last sermon on May 22, 1842, at a church in [{Salem, Massachusetts]] and died August 2, 1843, at the age of 46, due to his lingering illness.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:07, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]