User talk:Jkelly

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.

Previous discussions:

• Archive 1 (September 2 2005 to November 4 2005)

---

Re: User:Winnermario

Will do - I'll keep it in mind, however I can't promise I'll just let her off the hook if she exclaims something completely unfounded or insults me personally. I'm trying to counter her exclamations with questions that would (hopefully) just make her step back and think for a moment... I don't think she would accept other people's comments as gospel if we were to issue them to her in the manner she gives them to us. I'll cool it for a bit and see how the conversation goes. -- eo 20:49, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

eep.

I tried, I really did. But she commented on my Talk Page and went too far. Sorry she didn't even appreciate your attempt to stick up for her. -- eo 01:44, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Your message

I've just seen it, and was adding a warning message to the anon's Talk page when I edit-conflicted with you. Glad to see that things are improving.

As to The Waterboys, I'll certainly look in. (I only have one of their albums, but that's one more than I have of most of the "artists" whose articles I've been involved with lately.) --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:02, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

re: The Waterboys

The article is solid. The only things I thought it needed I did myself: I bulleted the list of performers, and I formatted the discography to match the ususal Wikipedia style (are those really all of the singles they've had). You might want to add about two album covers to the middle section to add some color to the long section of text.

PS. Cool band, btw. I should check their stuff out. --FuriousFreddy 02:42, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Yeah...big difference in sound, although both are quite good. I know how you feel about everything: Wikiepdia becomes a less and less pleasant place everyday. I saw the exchange between Winnermario and eo, where she said things to him that I hoped I'd never have to read here. I've actually started telling some of my friends & co-workers about the problems on Wikipedia, and they all have the same answer: leave. So... I'm gradually phasing out my contributions. I think it's Wikipedia's increasing popularity that's causing the problems: more and more people, who could really care less about encyclopedia standards (I, having been a strange child, read encyclopedia volumes for fun) and civility. I imagine unless some sort of strict quality control system is implimented (I've read Jimbo talking about doing such, after the whole Bill Gates/Jane Fonda quality debacle), it's going to simply gradually crumble in overall credibility.

Examples:

• Rosa Parks just passed away, and some users want to get her article featured. However, there's been a large addition of POV text that reads well for Jet magazine, but not for the purposes of an encycliopedia. I don't imagine, however, it'll get cleaned up unless someone sits down and dedicates themself to doing such (that used to be my calling-card).
• Snoop Dogg and most related articles on albums, singles, and mixtapes (are mixtapes within our scope of coverage?). "Carey-cruft" has nothing on this. All the work of basically one person, who seemed a little confused when I informed him of the quality concerns. I had sat down to begin rewriting some of the articles, when I blew the whistle and said "no more". Ususally, Wikipedia editing takes up most of my after-work day (especially with re-writes like that); my art supplies and music production tools miss me.

But yeah...good luck with your break. Hope you get all the stress out of your system.

P.S. Free of the influence of Wikipedia for a few days, I was actually able to listen to Mariah Carey again without worrying about the problems here. Her "We Belong Together", 40+ punched-in vocal takes and final-chorus divulge into melisma aside, is not at all a bad song. --FuriousFreddy 03:09, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Keira Knightley

Hi, I listed quite a few non models that appeared on the cover of Elle at Talk:Keira_Knightley#Two_pictures(there may well be more). In light of this do you think the magazine cover can be considered fair use? Arniep 12:39, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Please look at this RfA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/Ramallite Zeq 12:40, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Re: WP:ALBUM

Now that you mention WP:NOR, it's got me thinking that it would be a good idea to explicitly mention on WP:ALBUM to avoid original research on album pages. Specifically, people seem to have a tendency to list bands and albums that influenced or were influenced by the album, without heeding WP:CITE or at the very least describing why a connection exists. Besides Ziggy Stardust, I also encountered this travesty here.—jiy (talk) 06:02, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Re: Cool (song)

Not a problem, my friend. --Hollow Wilerding 03:10, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Waterboyses

Hi. Congratulations on your continuing good work on "your" article -- but I happened to notice your question to Mel about its relegation (?) via a disambig page.

That movie is very well known where I happen to live, and although a quick Google suggests a certain uncertainty between Waterboys and Water Boys, I note that the NYT has reviewed it under the former title. I think it deserves an article, under the title "Waterboys" (or "Waterboys (film)" or whatever). I accept that "your" Waterboys are famous, but I hadn't heard of them; for this reason, I find it a bit hard to believe that the band is overwhelmingly more famous than the flick, and thus tend to think that the creation of a disambig page is a Good Thing. The user who did this should of course have fixed a lot of links accordingly: if he/she did this, I don't think any other notification was necessary -- just as I didn't ask for any when I converted MPP to a disambig page and spent a couple of the most boring hours of my life converting a lot of instances of "[[MPP]]" to "[[Member of Provincial Parliament|MPP]]". -- Hoary 07:17, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

I've moved the disambiguation page to The Waterboys (disambiguation) and moved The Waterboys back to where it belonged. I'm not really sure that a dab page is needed, to be honest; a "dablink" at the top of each page would have done. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 08:19, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Good point; I've added a redirect to the film at Water Boys. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 08:43, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

The album infobox 2 saga

I just wanted to thank you for all the effort you have put into resolving the dispute over the use of this template. I feel that it is one of those conflicts that has a tendency to wither into endless assertions in the vein of "no, I'm right, and you're wrong", which, aside from not achieving a solution, tend to polarise people and further hinder any progress. So, thank you, and here is a flower :) --Qirex 11:49, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Re:Please correct

No, I am not an administrator. I'm not sure if I'd make a good one, though, as I don't fully understand all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and am not the best user when it comes to resolving disputes. But thanks for the compliment anyway! :) Extraordinary Machine 23:13, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

I sometimes get quite stressed with disputes and overreact to them, but thanks anyway. :) Extraordinary Machine 18:05, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Beatles for Sale

Thanks for your comments on the article's FAC. Together, Jgm and I have worked to improve the article and cite more sources. Please have another look and tell us what you think. Johnleemk | Talk 16:15, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

I just wanted to thank you for your support of my RfA which finally passed! I greatly appreciate it! Ramallite ^(talk) 04:18, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your copy edit. Cheers,

Sam Spade 02:47, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip!

{{empty}} it is from now on! ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 17:19, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Hogeye

I am trying to figure out the status of the above RfC. Does your certification of the dispute still stand? The RfC was "re-listed", but as having only one certifier. I am interested in this because of a number of reversions at Fascism by User:Hogeye over the last few days. Jkelly 22:35, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

It cannot stand, since I did not make any attempt to solve the dispute this time. To avoid being confusing, I reverted the reopening and made a new page instead: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Hogeye 2. --cesarb 22:52, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Madonna image

Hi, I think you are right about the source of the image. I suppose the uploader could be an employee of Meredith Corp. Do you think good faith should be assumed? Arniep 20:51, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I still think the upload was a genuine donation rather than a fan trying to upload a photo. The user uploaded it to commons on June 14, 2005 but didn't get round to putting it on a Wikipedia page till September. When questioned about the license the user stated in the edit summary Der Urheber der Darstellung gestattet die Verwendung und Weiterverbreitung des Bildes mit oder ohne Veränderung unter der Bedingung, dass weiterverbreitete Kopien die Nennung seiner Urheberschaft ent (translated) The author of the representation permits the use and further spread of the picture further with or without change on the condition that spread copies further the denomination of its authority ent(?). That doesn't come across as fan type behaviour to me, rather an employee/photographer/company owner trying to be generous to this great thing they heard about Wikipedia, but then forgetting to actually link it on Wikipedia pages until September. Maybe the company could be contacted to ask if permission was granted? Arniep 23:12, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi, actually I used babelfish for the translation! Anyway, it turns out the text was copy-pasted from the license de:Vorlage:Bild-by (listed at de:Wikipedia:Lizenzvorlagen_für_Bilder#Gute_Lizenzen) which I think is something like Template:PD-self which possibly indicates the uploader was the photographer? Arniep 23:53, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi, you are right, it was a different photo. However I still can't see where user Peter-m tried to add the image on the German wikipedia as the user claimed but it doesn't really matter as it seems like it will be deleted on commons. You would think that there would be plenty of fans that would upload their photos to Wikipedia unforttunately it doesn't seem to be the case. Most fan sites seem full of copyrighted images, I am beginning to think that "fans" just prefer copyright images to their own or are stingy about giving their own photos away. Arniep 20:23, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Edit summary

Yeah, I'm aware of the edit summary and how it works. I'm just lazy most of the time.. WhisperToMe 04:29, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Ian Paisley

Hi. Thanks for your comment. I have usually tried to back up my statements with references. However, nearly this whole article is referenceless. It seems to me that the contributors are trying so hard to find more points to put down Ian Paisley, that they have forgotten that this is an Encyclopedic article, and not some case for the prosecution of alleged war crimes. This is not the only article that is slanted in Wikipedia, but it would have to be one of the worst. Wallie 17:49, 15 November 2005 (UTC) Hi. I hope you are right. At the moment, I am not allowed to put in anything. I have tried to accommodate them, but they just revert everything I say. Most of the article is unsupported views, and it seems impossible to make the article more NPOV. As you notice, my latest effort has already been reversed out. Wallie 18:06, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Protocols

Re: "Hi. I'm curious why you deleted my suggestion. Was it an editing accident, or did you think it was inappropriate? Jkelly 00:41, 16 November 2005 (UTC)"

I'm sorry, any deletion of text was purely an accident. I got caught in edit conflicts when I tried to post, and got rather lost in the chaos. Paul B 00:47, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I think I'm too tired. I also put this on your user page by mistake. Time for bed! Paul B 00:59, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I've restored your comment. Paul B 12:00, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Oh!

Concerning the nomination, I did not know this. So thank you for the clarification. :) Although I still think those votes should count as an anonymous supporter or opposer is still a somebody. But that's his call, not mine. Thanks anyway! --Hollow Wilerding 02:05, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

FDR and corporatism

Hi, I've got a question for you on Talk:Fascism. Right now it's at the bottom of the page, but if other edits intervene before you can get a look at it, just search the page for "03:57, 16 November 2005". -- Jmabel | Talk 04:00, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Omnipotence paradox

Thank you for your peer review comment on omnipotence paradox. Just the sort of useful comments which warm my blackened little editor's heart! I think I've addressed the concerns you raised, although a true Wittgenstein buff could certainly still elaborate on the article. Most importantly, I found the source information for the picture of Averroes (and during my searching, I came across a color version of the same Florentine painting detail, which is now what the article uses). Thanks again. Anville 10:45, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Adminship

You seem like a very good user, you know your way around Wikipedia policies and procedures, and you're very calm and intelligent when dealing with other users. Would you be interested in becoming an administrator? You've only been here about 3 months or so, but I'm convinced by your history of good edits that it shouldn't be much of a problem. :) Coffee 13:44, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Oh, I just noticed a couple of days ago that you tagged a bunch of images for speedy deletion because they were unsourced, and I thought it would help Wikipedia to have more administrators interested in image maintainance tasks like that. I actually hesitated to ask you about adminship then, since people might see 3 months as too short a time... but then I noticed today that this nomination is getting overwhelming support. And I also notice you do help with Wikipedia:WikiProject Fair use, which is great. With admin powers you could help in other ways too. :p Coffee 16:59, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Here you go: Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Jkelly. Just follow the instructions at the bottom of this page. Good luck! Coffee 17:40, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations on your impending adminship! Looks like your nomination was even better supported than my own. :) Coffee 17:55, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Removal of screenshots.

As a user up for adminship, I hope you can justify removing the copyrighted images from the Soul Calibur character articles. They are screenshots of a software/video game, which IS allowed under Wikipedia:Fair Use. Since you originally removed them, I am requesting you perform the tedious task of adding them back in unless you can justify their removal beyond Fair Use. Thanks. -- Bubbachuck 18:48, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Simply because they are screenshots does not automatically mean that they are allowed as fair use. Did the image description file include the source and the copyright holder? Was there any commentary on the image in the article? The vast majority of screenshots fail these two simple tests for acceptable fair use: if you don't like that, fix the images and articles concerned (or persuade the U.S. Congress to change copyright law). Physchim62 (talk) 05:16, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

My welcoming of you

Yeah... I wasn't talking about another user. Your little message made me laugh. I couldn't really come up with anything better than that, so I hope you weren't too confused. I'll see ya around, my friend. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 19:23, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Project Fair Use

Hi, thanks for the note, I've added my name as suggested. Arniep 01:30, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Thessaloniki

Hi there, I've got a script that I pass my Wikipedia edits through and it automatically converts safe HTML escapes (ie not gt, lt, or amp) into UTF-8. I read the style guide as you suggested, and it appears to say that UTF-8 is just as acceptable as markup ("Use the HTML entity <ndash; or type it in directly if your keyboard allows it."). UTF-8 also has the benefit of taking less space to code, and looks better in edit boxes/change pages. If you really think it's a problem, I can change my script to exclude mdashs & ndashs from conversion to UTF-8. Cheers, Cmdrjameson 23:32, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

image

We can't use that Paisley image for three years.

1. It is explicitly the copyright of the DUP.
2. It contains extraneous contextualising additions that are incompatible with NPOV. (You can't use an official portrait of Adams with the Tricolor, Paisley with the Union Flag, Bush with the Stars and Stripes. The use of official party portraiture is highlight controversial on WP and such images are often put up for immediate deletion.
3. The alternative image is covered legally for usage. That one isn't.

Please be careful with what images you install on articles. They could get WP into court. [[user_talk:Jtdirl]] 19:56, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

No problem. Crowncopyright images should come from crown sources, not through another site. And AFAIK no-one legally can change them, even to clean them up, because they remain the property of the crown. Fairuse is slightly more clear, free licence images dead clear. Sorry for not spotting earlier that the original CC image had been replaced by one a copy from a different source with less clear legal status. [[user_talk:Jtdirl]] 21:02, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Sweet Jesus! Was that what was showing on the page??? I was seeing the official image on the Paisley page, on the image page, everywhere I looked. Good God. No wonder someone was annoyed. That other image was totally unacceptable. Damn these caches. I'll clear it again. [[user_talk:Jtdirl]] 21:13, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

thanks for the intro

Thanks for the intro note, especially the tildes tip - I was sure there was a quicker way than writing it all as markup. I use WP everyday for work purposes, so I thought it was time I started putting something back. Thanks again, and I'll get back to you if I need any help! Bedesboy 22:04, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

how you define POV or NPOV in Macedonian dispute

Hi, you reintroduced "Former Yugoslav" in the article Macedonia (Greece). What leads you to the conclusion that this is more neutral, and how do you think the Republic of Macedonia's position is shown to achieve NPOV? Regards, Goldie (tell me) 06:36, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Jean Laplanche, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Jacques Lacan and Jean Laplanche

I apologize if my first edit comment on this was a bit snarky. The forced initial reference definitely was improved by your subsequent edit. However, I still cannot really see the point of mentioning Laplanche right there. Many students of Lacan underwent analysis and bacame psychoanalysts (or did other highly notable things). Foucault, Derrida, Althusser, J.A.Miller, and Irigaray, for example, all attended Lacan's seminars, and are all much more notable than Laplanche (I'm not certain of which years off the top of my head, but it still makes singling out Laplanche peculiar).

Btw. I think the Socialisme ou Barbarie reference in the Laplanche articles seems off. He certainly wasn't an initial founder of the group itself; perhaps he was for the journal that grew out of it, but that needs context. The Laplanche article falsely gives him a greater prominence than Lefort or Debord in this, which is definitely misleading. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 17:35, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

3rd Degree

I oppose your re-direct of 3rd Degree to Third degree. The former is a type #1 dis-ambiguation page (namely, a list of stubs that if expanded can be accessible from a dis-ambiguation page) and the latter is nothing but a link to Wiktionary. Georgia guy 02:05, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

I deleted Third degree, since there shouldn't be cross-project redirects, except in exceptional conditions. Titoxd^(?!?) 02:17, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Adminship

I have promoted you to adminship. Congradulations. Please familiarize yourself with the relavant policies before using those shiny new buttons. Raul654 05:47, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Well done! If you need to practise the one labelled "block", you're welcome to block me for a bit. (I'd rather appreciate being unblocked not to long thereafter, but I'd let you pull rank.) -- Hoary 10:39, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

• Congratulations, and you're very welcome! --Merovingian 11:13, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

• Indeed, may I also extend my congratulations, very well deserved! -- Ianblair23 (talk) 21:53, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

• Congratulations, and good luck! See you around WP.--Lordkinbote 00:13, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations and thanks

Congratulations on your successful RfA, and thanks for your support for mine. Looking forward to working with you. Cheers, AnnH ^(talk) 20:33, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Greater Hungary page move

"It seems as if you are preparing to create a Wikipedia:Disambiguation page."

Yes I do. :) PANONIAN (talk) 00:49, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Adminship

My pleasure. Congratulations and good luck! Jayjg ^(talk) 04:50, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations and Warning

Congratulations on your adminship. I came here to warn you that the IP that you and I have recently warned has switched to user page vandalism [1]. Please block him, thanks. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 19:27, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

(awarded as a gift due to the Holiday Season). εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 19:27, 28 November 2005 (UTC)