User talk:Tempshill/2003 to 2005

Welcome to Wikipedia - fonzy

Greetings! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. You can sign your name with ~~~~. If you have questions or doubts of any sort, do not hesitate to post them on the Village Pump, somebody will respond ASAP. Other helpful pages include:

• Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers
• Wikipedia:Manual of style
• Wikipedia:Naming conventions

Have fun! --Jiang 21:30, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)

---

"(Removed USB as a Mac innovation. Apple was not in the founding group or responsible for the popularization of USB.)" Perhaps not - but it was the first actual machine you could buy with USB, so perhaps it desrves some sort of mention, perhaps reworded. GRAHAMUK 02:27, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)

---

Howdy! Nice work on video game publisher. It doesn't look done yet (part of a paragraph is unfinished), but it looks great so far. Thanks for helping the 'pedia! —Frecklefoot 18:22, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

---

Development Hell

Nice initial article on development hell! Thanks for creating the entry. —Frecklefoot 14:25, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)

---

Hi, you need to set up a user page on Meta for your vote to count. It should have a link to your user page here, or redirect to it. Angela 00:20, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)

---

Hi, your Help page might have been a good idea, but Wikipedia:Help already existed. As things like user guides go in the Wikipedia namespace rather than the main article space, I put a pointer to there. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 21:50, 11 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Standard score

Hi, Tempshill. Got your question about the standard score article. I'm not entirely clear whether you're asking about the pic or the article, but I know of no missing pic, and the article naturally belongs to no one. I did at one point have a jpeg in one statistical article but it was removed long ago and Standard score doesn't seem to be the article. Jfitzg 21:02, 13 Oct 2003 (UTC) (I can be reached more dependably at User:Trontonian)

Bravo!!!!

Bravo on the article you wrote on the House Select Committee on Assassinations. The article flows well and deals with the JFK/MLK findings very without POV.

There's a few things I want to add, but I want to contact Gary Mack first...

Once again, Great Work!!!

hoshie 07:56, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Heroic medicine

Heroic medicine is now unprotected, so you can make the change you suggested on VfD (most votes were to keep it so it's been delisted from VfD now). Here's your comment in case you forgot it: Angela. 20:29, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

According to Google, which knows everything, this is a term that seems to be used only by natural-healing advocates, so an easy way to NPOV the article would be to insert this statement, e.g. "Heroic medicine is a term used by some people in the natural-healing community to denote aggressive conventional medical practices or methods which make people suffer, sicken, weaken, or die." I would do this myself but the page is protected. Tempshill 19:24, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

---

It sounds like the intention of this page is "History of computing methods" and I recommend it be renamed accordingly. "History of computing" will sound to 99% of our user base like it is the "History of computers" article.

So 99% of our user base are laboring under an error. We should therefore correct that error, not go along with it. Michael Hardy 21:19, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

The current text at the head of the article saying "See also history of computing hardware" takes care of my concern. Tempshill 00:54, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

---

Thanks for the clipper chip article. I was the one who requested it --Raul654 11:52, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)

---

QUOTE: "I removed this. I don't know what "proctored" really means here, and what happened and what were the results? Was this an act of terror or a test explosion that for some reason happened in an abandoned theater?

A report from the Philippines to the United States on January 20, 1995 stated, "What the subject has in his mind is that he will board any American commercial aircraft pretending to be an ordinary passenger. Then he will hijack [the] said aircraft, control its cockpit and dive it at the CIA headquarters."

From the government of the Phillippines to the government of the US?

Incidentally, I also wonder how much of this is real. There is a lot of stuff peering into the thoughts of terrorists, and the lack of attribution throughout the article is troubling. The look of it is that it was mostly cribbed from a single source. Tempshill 18:10, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)"

It was a test explosion. And it worked. "Proctored" means "done", or "committed" - to proctor a test is to make it happen.

The statement above came from a CNN article.http://edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/southeast/03/11/gen.phil.terror.blueprint/?related. And yes, the government of the Philippines sent information about these people from the government of the U.S.

BTW, you may wanna look below to see all of the sources of attribution. A lot did come from an article from the Washington Post on Operation Bojinka WhisperToMe 04:17, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

---

Tempshill, Tannin has just set up a vote for the Sep 11 attacks talk page about whther the word "terrorist" should be included or not. Arno 09:46, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Go button

Hi,

on VfD you wrote:

You wouldn't think this if Wikipedia correctly handled capitalization when using the "Go" button.

I developed the "Go" functionality. The Go button checks several caps variations, including capitalization of all words. So typing "acorn standard ballot" will still get you to Acorn Standard Ballot. Can you explain what you mean with "correctly"? See Wikipedia:Go button for the full functionality description (the "near match" is currently disabled together with the fulltext search for performance reasons).—Eloquence 01:17, Jan 18, 2004 (UTC)

Computer / Video games

Hi Tempshill - in the past you expressed a desire to work on merging Computer game and Video game - if you're still interested, I'm looking at a draft at Talk:Computer game/Computer and video games. Take a look, and edit or comment! Mark Richards 18:03, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

---

Design pattern (computer science)

Hi there. I stumbled on a sub-page of Design pattern (computer science) and was troubled by the article. It mostly seemed like it was advocating some terms from a 1995 book that are not widely used in programming, as far as I know. Most of the sub-links contain no information, and others, like anonymous subroutine objects pattern, looked like copyvio. Can you provide some more information, perhaps in the articles themselves? I added the article to Wikipedia:Pages needing attention. Tempshill 18:34, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)

First of all, copyrigth issues are clear because those are data-dumped from public domain or GPL'd website called Perl Design Patterns Book. About the quality of articles, yes there are a lot of craps as you have noticed. But I submitted them because I thought some, perhaps few of them have a good point. It is my conviction that wikipedia lacks more real computer programming issues. We have to cover more empirical, informal knowledge in the real world of programming.

P.S. I am sorry for my late reply.

-- Taku 01:58, Mar 13, 2004 (UTC)

Extradition

To answer your question: France never extradites its own citizens, even in the case of dual citizenship with the country asking for extradition. France, however, can prosecute its own citizens for crimes committed abroad. The country seeking prosecution has to transmit the charges to France for that purpose. This is quite cumbersome, since witnesses have to come give testimonies etc... Generally speaking, the French public does not trust too much the legal systems in some other countries, particularly the United States. David.Monniaux 15:28, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The business and economics forum

Anouncing the introduction of The Business and Economics Forum. It is a "place" where those of us with an interest in the business and economics section of Wikipedia can "meet" and discuss issues. Please drop by: the more contributors, the greater its usefulness. If you know of other Wikipedians who might be interested, please send this to them.

mydogategodshat 19:12, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

India edit

You've woefully misunderstood the Kashmir conflict with your edit. Muslim separatists and political wranglings over group communalism is very different from the social tenor of most Indians. Please read up on your Indian history. --LordSuryaofShropshire 20:49, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)

My edit you reverted was: That said, India and Pakistan have fought three wars with religious overtones of Hindu against Muslim, over the status of Kashmir. This is factually correct, and I don't think the statement is a generalization of the social tenor of India. Tempshill 23:19, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Category hoaxes

I do not agree that hoaxes is for possible hoaxes too. If that were the case then we should add the category hoaxes to nearly every religious teacher/guru/prophet/messiah/religion-founder. I do not think that this can be put into practice so I disagree with your proposed policy. Andries 20:20, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Reply on your talk page. Tempshill 20:21, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I think the category hoaxes should only be applied if the majority of scholars and scientists on the subject believe that something is a hoax. Andries 07:58, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Delegate

Hiya. Why did you list that page for deletion? I've only just written it! I went to the 'requested pages' list and saw that 'delegate' was on the list so I had a go at writing something. (I'm just a newbie so I don't know all the protocol - I'm sure I'll pick it up as I go along.) Adambisset 23:48, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC) :-)

Thanks for your reply dude :-) Adambisset 18:43, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thankyou

Thankyou very much for all your help.--Honeycake 17:16, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Rainbow Bridge

Yes, you're probably right - Rainbow Bridge isn't highly collectable. Good, though. It was the second album I ever bought. And it had nothing to do with the soundtrack of the film!

Best wishes, Cunningham

(PS I have no idea of any other way to leave you a msg)

Rainbow Bridge

Thanks for your advice. And my copy of Rainbow Bridge is in terrible condition, having been worn out in the 1970s. I have managed to compile myself a new version for an iPod, though! Cunningham

Wiki Characters

Hi Tempshill,

I actually first heard the terms through the Wiki page, where it was an ugly formatting mess with lots of footnote links right after each other. After reading the linked pages at the Portland Pattern Repository I was sufficiently amused to pull them out and make them articles. Admittedly, Housekeeping Zombie was not on the page.  ;)

I have no real objection to your proposed VfDs as long as you're aware that I was not the originator of the terms. I wrote them when I was still trying to figure out what a wiki was and am not really particularly attached to them. Cheers, BanyanTree 22:23, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are 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:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

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:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

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 what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Ford Escape Hybrid

Both Ford and Toyota have repeatedly stated that Ford received no technical assistance from Toyota in developing the Escape's hybrid system. It did infringe upon some Toyota patents, so required Ford to pay a license fee, but that isn't proof it was simply bought. However, a Japanese parts manufacturer has definitely done some of the work. It's certainly not accurate to state that it was simply bought wholesale from Toyota. —Morven 02:46, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)

GNMA

Thank you for your note. I made some edits to the GNMA article. Take a look at a diff and let me know what you think. Best regards, Morris 03:43, Jan 6, 2005 (UTC)

Hip hop

Apologies. I tried to rv the vandalism and i rv'ed the wrong page. my apologies. (AkA, i reverted the wrong version and you thought i was triffling. my apologies, again.) Project2501a 19:48, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

DYK

Amazingly slim margin. Good job. 68.81.231.127 10:29, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Company (law)

As I understand it: a "corporation" in the UK is simply a legal person existing as a corporate entity (see Corporation of London - which is actually a municipal governing body!). It has a separate legal identity to its members (as opposed to an "unincorporated association" which effectively is no more than a system of contracts between its members), as such it has legal rights and duties, can contract, own property, employ others, and be liable for torts and crimes. According to my legal dictionary, Corporations can be created by Royal Charter or Act of Parliament or, most commonly, by statutory registration (usually under the Companies Acts). In other words, companies are a type of corporation under UK law, but (1) because they alone come under company legislation such as the Companies Acts and (2) "Company" but never "Corporation" is in their title (e.g. in Boots Group PLC the "PLC" stands for "public limited company") then I think that a Company (law) article is appropriate. Note also that in the UK (and I believe the RoI too), we deal with "Company Law" as the type of law that affects companies, we rarely talk about "Corporate Law". This may be different usage to America - certainly if Brits hear a story about "X Corp." or "X Corporation" we automatically assume it to be American. I will try to find a way of explaining this in the article. I am no great expert though. VivaEmilyDavies 13:47, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations

...on getting your account back. — Knowledge Seeker দ 21:43, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Interested in an L.A.-area Wiki meetup?

It appears as though L.A. has never had a Wiki meetup. Would you be interested in attending such an event? If so, checkout User:Eric Shalov/Wikimeetup

- Eric 16:38, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Petra Haden pic

Just heard from Mike Watt regarding the Petra Haden photo on her entry:

cj,

I in fact did take the photo you refer to and you have my full permission to use it at the wikipedia.org site.

mike watt

Tempshill, before I go any further I should note that I posted a copy of Mr. Watt's e-mail to your talk - he didn't. Anyway, I'll reply to him regarding the GDFL hurdle. -- Ceej

PA 103

Hi Tempshill, I saw you remove the thing about the spy satellites reading newspapers. I don't want to revert you but I'd appreciate it if you'd add that back. It's sourced to one of the investigative journalists who wrote about PA 103 and his sources were the Lockerbie investigators. I can put a citation after the sentence if you think it's necessary. SlimVirgin ^(talk) July 8, 2005 00:29 (UTC)

Dicdefs

Hi. Please label anything you see as a dicdef with {{Move to Wiktionary}}, as they can be used over there even if they aren't suitable for encyclopedia articles. Your bulk adding of these to VfD isn't really going to help as there will likely be no consensus over qulaity dicdefs. Thanks. Harro5 23:48, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

Province of the Carolanas

Hi, I noticed that you participated in the VfD for John Lilburne Research Institute. I am nominating another article created by the same user: Province of the Carolanas, which is another massive hoax/vanity/original research article. --JW1805 18:58, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

• See also: Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Eric Gilder (professor)

• I am also nominating another page created by this same user, which is also vanity/soapbox/original research: Four Freedoms Federation. See talk page for details. --JW1805 20:12, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
• I just renominated this one: John Lilburne Research Institute. --JW1805 00:58, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Ian Gillan Picture

Thanks for the info. I did indeed take the picture. I have licensed it, as per, under the GFDL. Cheers! Slugguitar 09:47, Aug. 5, 2005 (UTC)

---

Hello again, as per your ideas, I enlarged the thumbnail in the article. We can see his face better now, and I didn't crop it because there are people dear to me in there :) Cheers! Slugguitar 09:57, Aug. 16, 2005 (UTC)

John Lilburne Research Institute

Sorry for the delay; was on vacation what you left your message and I'd forgotten to get back to it.

I can't really say much more about consensus than that it's a judgment call, and a simple majority is not sufficient; consensus is intended to indicate unanimity or near-unanimity, though in practice it's more like "rough consensus". Anything where you actually have to count the number of votes rather than immediately seeing a trend is probably no consensus -- to keep or delete.

The original debate looked like a clear lack of it; with 4 delete and 3 keep all from legitimate users and the fact that someone had already gone to the trouble to merge and redirect the content suggested that there was no clear consensus on what to do with it, and thus default to keep for no consensus. If it is indeed a hoax I'm glad to see it now deleted; I did not do any research on this article in the original VfD, merely read and interpreted the results. Neither side had a knock-down compelling argument that would swing it either way. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 03:40, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Salad Finger Theories

Thanks for the advise about creating it on my user page (currently im writing a Psychology paper and have little time for Wikipedia to read the ins and outs) it's a valueble resource I should use. It may be a 6 episode series, but it is certainly perhaps a series with so much depth that it is indeed an interest for Wikipedians and fans to learn about. I don't mind if the article is deleted as you said i could always improve on my user page. Still, when i get round to a full article, it may not be best to be merged (which would clutter and confuse the present Salad Finger article as merging the psychology of Salad Fingers with the facts of Salad Fingers would both prove an eye sore). Am i entitled to appeal that the article when completed be kept seperate? cheers --Raddicks 00:44, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Abortion comments re. recent SCOTUS nominee

You need to chill. The comments I've put in are lifted nearly word-for-word from Ruth Bader Ginsburg's entry. See for yourself. BTW, are you an Admin? There's a bit of a discussion over at the Wiki complaint page that seems apropos.

To continue: this is yet another example of Left-POV Admins creating content wars. The language I put in had otherwise survived nearly the entire day. The final sentence is probably what provoked your unwarranted actions, but you should have edited it, not deleted the entire section.--66.69.219.9 22:27, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Continuing further: Again, I stand by my original comments. It is quite demonstrably 'true' that the fundamental reason that Roe vs. Wade is so controversial is because of the lack of legislative support for it, and that it effectively pre-empted the democratic process. Ginsburg is a seated U.S. Supreme Court justice; you'll have to pardon me if I defer to her own misgivings for Roe vs. Wade...not your POV. Lastly, there is no content war for only ONE reason: I know that if I continue to revert, you'll reach into your Admin bag of tricks and have me blocked for 48 hours or so. I'd prefer to stick around and document this episode, as it is a classical example of what is being actively discussed on the Complaints page.--66.69.219.9 22:37, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Flying tank picture

Thanks a lot for the flying tank picture. Cheers, Michael Z. 2005-10-12 06:47 Z

Appreciate info. on viruses

Appreciate the info on viruses. The virus that I had heard discussed has the alleged ability to act in a manner in which you kill it, only you only get 1/2 of it, then it reproduces itself and acts like nothing has happened and it is designed to take your computer out, turning it into a useless paperweight, unless the motherboard, other chips,etc. are replaced. Sounds like this bug would be a perfect terrorist weapon.I've also heard about it on the news.Martial Law 00:38, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Are there awards for investigative activities?Martial Law

NO. I am NOT nominating myself.Martial Law

Tracing IP Adresses

Thanks for answering my question about tracing IP adresses. Are there any of the developers you have worked with or communicated in the past that have been helpful? Just wondering.. Davidpdx 11:39, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the image alert

I accidentally misspelled the name of my "I, PiccoloNamek, took this" template, but it's fixed now.PiccoloNamek 23:32, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Re: Bus Image

Dear Tempshill,

Regarding the images, the author of the specified site gave me permission to use the images, so long as I leave the copyright information on the image (in white text) I apologize if I incorrectly licensed the image, but as a "newby" the license page is a challenge in itself. What license do you suggest I place these images under?

Master Jay

St. Petersburg images

I don't see a notice stating that they are in public domain. But they are photos submited for use on the city web site. [1] There is no indication that they are copyrighted photos that the city only happens to have permission to use, or photos that the city later copyrighted. So it is safe to conclude that they are for public use, just as (say) materials from the CIA Factbook or the LOC Country Handbooks. 172 | Talk 22:34, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm aware that the law differs, but in practices cities often want their information to be public in order to promote commerce. That being said, it's not much of a surprise that there is no indication of a city copyright on the website. So the evidence points to the photos being public. 172 | Talk 22:53, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

The page indicates that the individuals who took the photos gave St. Petersburg the right to use them. But I'll just go ahead and circumvent the question of whether or not the photographers could claim ownership in a court by tagging them fairuse. 172 | Talk 23:15, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

You're welcome. Thanks for the feedback. 172 | Talk 23:20, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Grocery Store Photo

The photo is not suppose to represent a logo. If it became one, not certain how that occurred. The photo, however, was meant to be copyrighted thru the Wikimedia Foundation, donated to the Wikimedia Foundation by the author. The author is new at this so mistakes may have occurred during uploading. Ariele 21:43, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Maybe later. Ariele 00:54, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Still unclear. Click on "Upload file" on the bottom left corner of the screen. The template has an entry called "licensing". Under licensing, it asks the author to choose one out of the list. Under "Non-free licenses", it has a subheading "Image copyrighted by Wikimedia". That includes a copyright logo which is a Wikimedia copyright logo. Are you making a demand that I release the image for public use instead? Ariele 01:23, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

About pictures

All the pictures which i've uploaded were on my HD and i found them on small & unknown personal sites and as a result they are not copyrighted

So, dont worry about it I never use anything has to do with piracy ;)

Cya

Accenture Photo

So the Accenture India photo doesn't add to the content! How come? I was under the impression that a picture is worth a thousand words.

Visiting my Blog

I guess you are working in Anderson Consulting. U have been visiting my blog. Any suggestions? By the way, the Accenture building I had photographed houses 5000 employees and will house another 5000 soon, making it one of its most important sites.

Telepathos

Hi, Ive replied to your new comment: Talk:Telepathy#This_article_needs_a_lot_of_work -Psyche 20:44, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Again. -Psychelogy 06:44, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Picture

I'm not sure how to change the rights info on the image now that it's already up. I just want it to be "free domain", I don't really care what gets done with it. If you know how to change the rights info, be my guest. I'll leave my discussion page alone from now on I guess.

doubt

Thanks for the information.since iam new to this site iam not familiar with the rules.now i just want to know if there is any restriction in uploading an image created by me.

When the Tigers Broke Free

Hi there. I'm pretty sure Waters means the British high command on "When the Tigers Broke Free". This is especially evident in the context of The Final Cut. :) --RmM 16:05, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Missing image

Copied from the help desk:

From the deletion log: 11:36, 10 December 2005 JesseW deleted "Image:Tournamentbracket.png" (WP:CSD Image #4 - "Images in category "Images with unknown source" or "Images with unknown copyright status"which have been on the site for more than 7 days, regardless of when uploaded.")

It looks like you failed to include source or copyright info. i agree it would be nice no notify uploaders in such cases, and i try to, but policy does not currently require it. Images cannot be undeleted in the same way that other content can, see Wikipedia:Lost images for more on this. DES ^(talk) 17:22, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

The image is still avaialble at answers.com if you want to grab it and re-uplaod it, with proper source and copyright info. DES ^(talk) 17:38, 14 December 2005 (UTC)