User talk:Zanimum/Archive 19/Archive 4

Cosplay pictures

Please, please stop putting cosplay pictures into articles where they are not appropriate. I remember the lengthy discussions relating to the leotard article; now you have added a similar image to the maid article. Can you tell me why you consider these images to be appropriate illustrations for these articles? -- The Anome 12:38, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)

Why aren't these appropriate? For starters, there are no other images of maids available for us to use, so far as I know. Would you not agree that something is better than nothing? Also, when we have many other opportunities to get images of villains and mad scientists, through the marvel of screen captures, we end up with two cartoons. Not only that, but these cartoons are deemed "featured" by the Wikipedia community. -- user:zanimum

Reputation

My impression of you was limited to a vague "been around a long time, and reasonably active". You've changed that in one fell swoop.

Adding to a WP article an ext lk p't-ing to your own column on a pop-under-ing site is not a minor edit
Failing to remove that lk when you knew it had stopped being a "regular" column is irresponsible, and also serves to further impeach your good intentions.
If you're really only in your first term of "Advertising and Graphic Design", your fate is not sealed, but it is already time to be thinking about whether you want to be an art director, and of the kind that your colleagues
- feed with raw meat,
- keep the client from meeting, and
- justify with "his stuff always looks great; never mind whether it means anything."

or if you're willing to learn the syntax of English and form the habit of proofreading what you sign.

Nearly all childless, single, teenage kid-TV enthusiasts are incompetent to write under the heading "Family Entertainment"; the incompetent ones include all those who don't realize that the competent ones need to specifically address that credibility problem.

--Jerzy (t) 16:34, 2004 Nov 29 (UTC)

Go to Google. Type "children's television" in. And if you think that's solely from the extra links Wikipedia provides, it's been this way since a month or two before that edit. I get absolutely no profit from this column, I solely volunteer.

When I signed up with Suite, the pop-unders weren't there. Frankly, there were very few ads at all.

As for the lack of new content, give me a break. Ignoring my school work, I've been too busy contributing to Wikipedia, and retrofitting my newly adopted Academy Awards column.

Also, it seems to me that you're giving me the blame for being public about my other activities. Before a few weeks ago, I would have been "safe" from you, as my personal info was limited.

What is your problem anyway about the whole "oohhh... you're going to fail!" stuff? Other than a run on sentence, I can't see anything wrong with the syntax of my bio. Even if there was, you are among five people to see the page since the start of the month. Frankly, those others are likely web crawlers. People don't really care about who's giving them the information.

The point is, my articles on Wikipedia and Suite101 are factually accurate, and decisively opinionated. I'm not a media fluff-ball like most other family ent outlets. Dr Toy will give anything the stamp of approval, so her name can be touted in press releases and on the video jacket. I give an honest, unbiased opinion that's rare in the preschool DVD field. This has counted for a lot, and quotes from my article have often been used on the manufacturer's websites. -- user:zanimum

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started the Free the Rambot Articles Project which has the goals of getting users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to...

...all U.S. state, county, and city articles...
...all articles...

using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) version 1.0 and 2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to the GFDL (which every contribution made to Wikipedia is licensed under), but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles (See the Multi-licensing Guide for more information). Since you are among the top 1000 most active Wikipedians, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles.

Nutshell: Wikipedia articles can be shared with any other GFDL project but open/free projects using the incompatible Creative Commons Licenses (e.g. WikiTravel) can't use our stuff and we can't use theirs. It is important to us that other free projects can use our stuff. So we use their licenses too.

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} template (or {{MultiLicensePD}} for public domain) into their user page, but there are other templates for other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} with {{MultiLicensePD}}. If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know at my talk page what you think. -- Ram-Man 21:27, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure how you would like things dumbed down. What was the confusing part? I'm not sure how else to explain this. -- Ram-Man 21:54, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)

I understood it, but up until you posted this message, I, and most other Wikipedians didn't know that you could dual license articles, and suddenly we have to respond to how we would like them licensed. Possibly a gentler introduction would have been better. I dunno. -- user:zanimum

Cosplay

Hey, where did you get all the cosplay pictures from? Do you happen to have a list of all the ones on the wikipedia? -Cookiemobsta 06:21, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Primarily SKA.fam.cx -- user:zanimum

A Request

Over at Culture of the United Kingdom one of the main things that is stopping us from putting it forward as a featured article candidate is the fact that the art section is so small (one small paragraph). You have listed yourself on Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by fields of interest as someone with an interest in art. Would you be able to pop over there at some point and help us to expand the section please? Many thanks. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 11:53, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Multi-licensed into the public domain
I agree to multi-license my eligible text contributions, unless otherwise stated, under Wikipedia's copyright terms and into the public domain. Please be aware that other contributors might not do the same, so if you want to use my contributions in the public domain, please check the multi-licensing guide.

Remember to warn

Remember to put {{test}} on the user pages of any user who creates a non-sensical page. -- user:zanimum

I thought I talked most of them, but occasionally one might get missed. I'll pay better attention in future. --fvw *† 01:27, 2004 Dec 2 (UTC)

Oh, good, glad to know you do so regularly. It seems too many admins that don't follow up on the user pages. -- user:zanimum

Your "tarantula"

The picture you put on the tarantula article is a very attractive picture, but it is not a picture of a tarantula. It's a picture of a jumping spiders -- creatures that I've been in love with for the last 50 years. Somebody else had already removed it before I saw it. Where did you get the picture? We may be able to use it on the "Jumping Spider" article somehow, especially if I can figure out the species. (Too bad the view of the upper surface of the abdomen is not clearer, but you've got a beautiful shot of the head. Jumping spiders are the only ones I know of that seem to be aware that somebody is looking at them, and they like to look back. They seem to be as curious about us as we are about them. P0M 08:41, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Kiki

If you remember back a little bit, you were kind enough to test the idea of Kiki with nine kids. You said they were interested in her, as long as she were intelligent. Since then, Kiki has developed into a character that appears on ever few pages in the books, and occasionally interviews real-life scientists, politicians, artists, dancers, zookeepers, what ever relates to the book. These people will be shown in cartoon form, in their work environments. For example, I'm hoping to have "Kiki" interview a NASA scientist or astronaut, or some sort of astronomer, for the debut Solar System issue. Would you be able to run this new role for Kiki past the kids you talked to before, and see if this interests them? The character is in trouble of being eliminated by criticism from other users. -- user:zanimum

Point me at the discussion please? Pedant 18:52, 2004 Dec 6 (UTC)

Sure, it's at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikijunior_project_Kiki_character . Thanks! -- user:zanimum

AMA

What do you know about the AMA? Is it caput, or is it still actually functioning? -- user:zanimum

Zani, good question about the AMA -- based on the activity at their requests for assistance page (I forget the name exactly, but it's linked to from WP:AMA) I think it's crawling along at a snail's pace. It would appear that someone called Keith Tyler (I don't know him) is handling most of what few requests arrive. I imagine that it, like the harmonious editing club and dozens of other voluntary associations here, didn't have sufficient gravity to keep itself together. Perhaps it will revive one day. I think it was little used, though, for the basic reason that most people who need help with dispute resolution have already decided who they will trust to give them answers, and so they don't go looking for an "organization" to provide help. The few I ever saw go to the AMA mistakenly seemed to believe that they were acquiring a mediator (and one who would be favorable to them) -- most of them seemed to abandon AMA assistance once they discovered the "actual" dispute resolution procedure. Sorry for the long answer. Did you ask for any particular reason, by the way, or just curiosity? :-) Jwrosenzweig 21:25, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks JW, I was curious because you and I had run the inaugural (and possibly only ever) election for the AMAs. Do you think there should still be an election, being six months after the initial one? -- user:zanimum