User talk:Random89

Welcome!

Hello, Random89, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Jeff3000 03:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Minischool.jpg[edit]

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Minischool.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. VegitaU 03:29, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Point[edit]

A tag has been placed on The Point (film) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Orange Mike | Talk 00:29, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See also The Point! --Orange Mike | Talk 00:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Point[edit]

Your article has been saved from deleted and recreated at [1] Zazaban (talk) 00:48, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Crossroads (band)[edit]

I have nominated Crossroads (band), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crossroads (band). 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. Random89 (talk) 21:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please...[edit]

(1) You don't move a page by blanking it; you use the "move" button; otherwise the edit history is lost.

(2) "Gauss's Law", with a capitalized initial "L", conflicts with standard Wikipedia conventions that say it should be lower case. Michael Hardy (talk) 03:00, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...and what does "blanked redirect for move" mean? If you wanted to move talk:Gauss' law to talk:Gauss's Law, why would you not want the former title to redirect to the latter? Michael Hardy (talk) 03:10, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that was an editing error. The page wouldn't move for me so I tried to remove the redirect that was there to try and make it work. I was trying to move Gauss's Law back to Gauss' Law, not vice versa. When I decided to give it some time and talk it over first I tried to self-revert, but apparently I messed that up. Thanks for bringing this up. Random 89 05:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On second look, what may have happened was that User:Lingwitt performed a copy-paste move from Gauss' to Gauss's and when I tried to revert, the edit history of Gauss' Law prevented me. I could be wrong though... Random 89 06:10, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please be more careful...[edit]

I got a message from you saying that I vandalized TV Links after I reverted vandalism back to a previous version. I especially love how your "reverted" edit of my "vandalism" re-added the word "ass" back to the page. At least you fixed your own mistake, but you left a notice on my talk page saying that I vandalized the article. In the future, please be more careful with your so-called "constructive" edits. 71.132.203.84 (talk) 21:07, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...71.132.203.84 (talk) 21:41, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bro[edit]

On Thizz , it's Ecstasy. Not Cocaine. Lol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.165.166.151 (talk) 22:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your rollback request[edit]

Please use {{subst:rfr|Your Username|Short reason for wanting rollback}} ~~~~ when making your request. Thanks, Tiptoety ^talk 04:01, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done Please see WP:New admin school/Rollback to practice, and thoroughly read WP:ROLLBACK. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 18:43, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ITN/C changes[edit]

I know this is a borderline WP:BOLD action, but you know, these things tend not to happen by themselves. Considering the long history of stasis at ITN, I think I am prepared for someone to revert if they feel this is out of line, but I hope not.--Pharos (talk) 09:07, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see User:Grant.Alpaugh has already reverted to status quo. I do think that the discussion was on a page quite well advertised to "regular" contributors, and one in which many have participated over the last several weeks, certainly as many as have participated at the "main" ITN talk page recently. If you agree that it's worth trying for a few days, then perhaps you can share this sentiment at Template talk:In the news. Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 18:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fishery science topics[edit]

Hi Random89. Well these are user interface issue, and this particular template is problematical. The problem starts with the picture. The picture can't be of a fishery scientist, because that is confusing when you go to an article which doesn't have a picture. So I tried out various abstract pictures, and I'm still not altogether happy with the present one.

You made your edit when I was still working on the template and associated articles. It is tidier now, and I think reasonably intuitive. All the links in the top group have the template attached. For various reasons, it wouldn't be appropriate to attach the template to the three in the bottom group, which is why they are in the bottom group. Since the top group all have templates, it goes initially to the top person in that group. It can't link back to Fisheries science because that already has its own template. And I don't like just going to the template by itself, because that leaves the user kind of dangling.

As you imply, it would be best if there was an article Personalities in Fisheries Science (or perhaps History of Fisheries Science with an emphasis on the people). I don't have time or the inclination to write that at the moment, but you're very welcome to have a go if you want. --Geronimo20 (talk) 22:05, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Umm, thanks Random, though I reverted your edit to Template:Fishery science topics since it prevented the user going to the personalities. --Geronimo20 (talk) 07:32, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree with you. But the way the templates are structured is that each template really needs its own lead article. In this case, the appropriate lead article would be on the history of fisheries science, and, well written, that would certainly be a notable article. --Geronimo20 (talk) 09:24, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But then we lose Template:Fishery science topics altogether, and there is no point in having the menu item "personalities" in Template:Fishery science topics. --Geronimo20 (talk) 19:47, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Supergroup[edit]

I got your message, I did some cleaning up and I left a new discussion topic on the actual definition. We need to come up with something solid and put a section on it in the discussion page at the very top where it will stay permanantly so people will hopefully understand what we are trying to do. I honestly think we should try to get the page semi-locked or completely locked. I tried that once, but I think if we could work together we could try to argue how people just roll on through, add a favorite band or two and never return. The term itself and the bands are pretty stagnant and few changes should be made once we complete our defintion and clean up. So there is no need for people to edit the page. Get back to me. Let's use e-mail, my address is zosomm90@yahoo.com. Zosomm90 (talk) 19:06, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to make sure you were still around. Its good that there are others involved and I want to work with them to improve the page. I've just been very busy. I think we should get rid of the list and use the citation rule. This could finally get to a well composed article. Zosomm90 (talk) 18:43, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ITN[edit]

On 6 July, 2008, In the news was updated with a news item involving the article(s) Georgian-Ossetian conflict, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently updated or created article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--Banyan Tree 01:02, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 20 July, 2008, In the news was updated with a news item involving the article(s) 2008 Cambodian-Thai stand-off, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently updated or created article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--Banyan Tree 05:30, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 July, 2008, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article(s) 2008 Open Championship, which you created or substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--Banyan Tree 13:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 16 October, 2008, In the news was updated with a news item involving the article(s) Canadian federal election, 2008, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently updated or created article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--Spencer^T♦^C 20:23, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 October, 2008, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article(s) United Nations Security Council election, 2008, which you created or substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--Spencer^T♦^C 13:58, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks[edit]

This was both unexpected and very thoughtful of you. The amusing part is that I decided to take a break from ITN a few days ago and did not actually post the item, after deciding to limit myself to occasional comments while I recharge my batteries in the main namespace. Since it has been decided that the bias for inclusion will be ignored and that random comments outside of ITN/C will be counted to support the whim of whatever an admin parachuting in wants to do anyway, I think I will return there. I have a limited amount of time onwiki and simply can't spend all of it having the exact same arguments over and over. Good luck, Banyan Tree 23:47, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Mainpage Talk[edit]

Sorry, I never thought of the majority of them as "morons" to be "drive[n] off in boredom" at all, rather inexperienced users or IPs who might be useful long-term if not short-term. I thought engaging with them on the Main Page was a much better way for them to spend their time than vandalising George W. Bush or whatever the latest trend is these days. I do however revert blatant hate attacks, although the reason sometimes for not reverting is that the comment was not the last edit and going through such a massive history can collapse my computer. Although a lot of the stuff I've been replying to on the Main Page and its surrounding pages has been nothing short of nonsensical gibberish lately, so I clearly don't know where to draw the line, sorry again. Hopefully no harm will come from these actions. And thank you for bringing this carelessness to my attention. :) --can dle •wicke 10:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ITN for Academy Awards[edit]

On 8 March, 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 82nd Academy Awards, for which you recently wrote a blurb and found a photo. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

It turned out great thanks to you. -SusanLesch (talk) 20:51, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer granted[edit]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. –xeno^talk 01:17, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]