User talk:Ntennis/Archive

Welcome to my talk page. If u are responding to a comment I left on your talk page, pls respond there. If you leave a comment here, I will respond here. Cheers! :)

Welcome[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

Meelar (talk) 01:31, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)

User language boxes for sign language[edit]

Thanks for creating these; I liked them!! I'm afraid I can't think of any constructive feedback. :) Some of these pedantic for details might be vaguely upset that you aren't using seperate boxes for seperate (sign) languages, although I can understand why you chose to go with the approach you did... I'd have done the same myself. Have put one for myself on my user page. :)

Mija 12:00, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work on these. I put one up on my page :) Qaz

babel[edit]

Hi Ntennis, I put another Babel table on your user page, since you said at talk:babel that you had some difficulty with using the language templates with parameters. I hope this is what you wanted. --MarSch 09:33, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for pointing out the substemplate! I didn't know it existed because by its nature it erases itself in the code. I will update Category:User sgn accordingly. However I decided to keep my unconventionally-formatted babel table. :) ntennis 01:46, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

PSE[edit]

Hello, Ntennis. I just noticed that you have a deep interest in signed languages and have contributed a great deal to many of the Wikipedia articles about them. I am a sign language interpreter for ASL, so I have a professional interest. One of my pet wiki-projects was to nurture the articles and references to Pidgin Signed English... which you recently merged into the article on Contact Sign.

I'm not upset, I'm just wondering why you didn't feel that PSE warrented an article of its own. The Bearded One 21:46, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello :) I foreshadowed this on your talk page about 6 weeks ago. For me, I feel a PSE page is a bit redundant for two main reasons:

There is nothing unique about PSE that couldn't be said about "Pidgin Sign German", for example. These contact phenomena are common with Deaf sign languages. Do we make a Pidgin Sign German page, a Pidgin Sign Japanese page, even a seperate PSE (ASL) and a PSE (BSL) page? The same content would just be duplicated on each.
The term PSE, though still in use, seems to be increasingly replaced by the term Contact Signing — even in ASL circles. For example, from an ASL linguistics glossary:

Contact Sign: ... is sometimes referred to as Pidgin Sign English (PSE); however, many linguists today do not consider it a true pidgin because its grammar and lexicon are more complex than those of most (spoken language) pidgins (see pidgin).

Pidgin: ... Pidgins have a significantly reduced grammatical structure, lexicon, and stylistic range. ... Contact sign is sometimes referred to as Pidgin Sign English (PSE), but it is generally not considered by linguists to be a pidgin (see contact sign).

Also [1], [2] and [3].

I wrote the Contact Sign article yesterday and felt that rather than cut and paste info from there into PSE I'd just redirect PSE to the Contact Sign article. However, if you feel PSE warrants its own page, by all means resuscitate it! However, please note that the phrase PSE is used to describe contact 'languages' that arise between English and BSL, English and Auslan, English and NZSL etc. as well as English and ASL. Also, a google search finds the phrase "Pidgin Sign English" on 694 pages [4], and "Pidgin Signed English" on 503 pages [5], many of these the wikipedia page and its mirrors, and others are actually written "Pidgin Sign(ed) English". Pidgin Sign English seems to be the most commonly used term. I don't feel strongly about it but I prefer it without the "-ed", perhaps because it gives equal weight to sign and english; with P "signed" E the signing becomes just an adjective for what is essentially English. Anyway, please make up your own mind and do what you feel is best.

I will bow to your superior knowledge of non-ASL sign languages. As a professional interpreter in the USA, I know that the Deaf community in my local area and other interpreters here still use the term "PSE" to refer to type of contact sign which is a distinctive blend of English and ASL. I liked what you wrote on the Contact Sign page, and I'll look to see if there is anything I can do to expand or clarify the text. As I said, I am a professional interpreter, not a scholar. I just wish there were some way for my personal experience to add to the collective data that is Wikipedia.... The Bearded One 05:41, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if you felt I bulldozed the PSE article. Your experience is certainly valuable for wikipedia! One of the great things about wikipedia is that it's a great leveller — i'm not a professional scholar either, but in a sense we are all scholars who contribute here. We don't need degrees to do it! I, like you, am a (part-time) interpreter (Auslan/English). I use wikipedia to educate myself. If there's a topic I want to know about, I research it until I know enough to start or add to an article. Future wikipedians may not have this priviledge, once all the articles become refined! :P Anyway, good luck editing and drop me a line any time. ntennis 06:48, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Monitoring Xian NPOV[edit]

As an aside, you mentioned on your user page that u are POV-policing the Christianity pages. That is a brave thing to do! Can I ask what is your interest in the religion? You can see I've been editing some of these pages too though I try to stay away from conflicts. Email me if u prefer to continue the discussion privately. Cheers and best wishes, ntennis 02:40, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Early in my explorations of Wikipedia, I found a page called Historical Jesus. I was stunned to find that the page bore no caveat that there might never have been a historical figure of Jesus at all. So I began hunting around the various Xianity pages to see if there were any other blatantly POV problems. I found about six, tried to fix them, and monitored them for reversions. I should probably remove the note from my User page because all of them have settled into reasonable likenesses to NPOV. I currently have only one such page on my watch list. Most of my watch list now is either interpreting-related or role-playing related (my chief hobby). Cheers. The Bearded One 05:41, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your first award[edit]

I hereby duly bestow upon you an exceptional newcomer award by the authority of the Royal Dugong Order for Perpetual Free Information. This is in recognition of your hard work, great care and diligence. Great thanks for the important task you have undertaken with alacrity. Qaz ^(talk) 08:36, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou :) This made me very happy. The butterfly is lovely! ntennis 06:50, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling error[edit]

Thank you for fixing the spelling error on my page. I too thought the phrase was quite excellent, and deserved a special mention in Wikipedia. I admit, I am not the greatest of spellers (I can't say I've ever won a spelling bee :) ), and I thank you for correcting that error. I do not take it personally when someone corrects a grammar or spelling error in one of my posts (such as a double letter or word, etc.), so long as they do it respectfully. I guess that's what the Wiki is all about. I'd love to find out from where that quote origonated (I'd be glad to post a picture of the shirt I coppied it from), and any help would be appreciated. Again, thank you and happy editing, [[User:Mys e kurity|Mysekurity]] ^{[[additions | e-mail]]}_{03:19, 15 October 2005 (UTC)}[reply]

No probs :) ntennis 03:29, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Language for sign language[edit]

I've made a few modifications to {{language}} so that it can be used for sign languages. All you have to do, is be sure to include the signers= parameter, and the template automagically modifies itself for sign languages. --Gareth Hughes 17:23, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Great work Garzo. You are clever! :) ntennis 05:21, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Open proxy[edit]

Hi Ntennis. Wikipedia permanently autoblocked you because you're operating from an ISP with an unsecure (open) proxy which I recently banned. Open proxies are prohibited from editing because they are used to launch attacks on Wikipedia that are very difficult to counter. If possible, you should contact your ISP and notify them that their proxy is insecure.

In the email you sent me, you didn't specify the IP address you edit from. If you can give me that, I can check if that IP can be safely unblocked. Sorry for the inconvenience. // Pathoschild 08:41, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your very prompt reply! I became unblocked a few minutes after being blocked. but from your post I'm not sure if it was you that unblocked me? My internet account has a dynamic IP address; I thought logging in allowed me to bypass this kind of problem, but I guss not as this is the second time I've been blocked because of my IP address despite being logged in.

Anyway I logged out as a quick way to find out my IP address (220.245.179.130). When I logged back in ("login successful") then tried to edit, I was told I wasn't logged in and was blocked from editing. Strange! I repeated this several times, logging in, clicking "edit" and suddenly being logged out. I am using a mac with safari as my browser. Is this a wiki bug? I'm posting this using firefox and i guess it worked.

I don't understand open proxy enough to contact my ISP about it, but you can contact them yourself if you like: http://www.tpg.com.au/

Cheers, ntennis 05:29, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh i'm blocked again. I think it's because my IP is changing constantly; some are blocked, others not. That still doesn't answer the strange question of spontaneous log-outs, and how i can get around this to continue contributing. ntennis 05:39, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your IP address has been unblocked, and you should be able to edit again. I'll contact your ISP to notify them of this security vulnerability. Sorry again for the inconvenience. As for your login problems, I don't think it's related to the block. // Pathoschild 05:58, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks :) ntennis 08:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to creep you out[edit]

...the looming half-face in the background... is my, um, "better half". I meant the inclusion as a sort of affectionate gesture to her. Hmmm... which shoulder is suppose to have an angel, and which a devil (I may have to mirror image the pic, depending, though I won't commit on what the goal is). Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 06:02, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Feeling creepy has it's associated pleasures too :) It probably wasn't an appropriate thing to say on such a sober and proper topic (!), but the way she is cut in half and hiding back there has always suggested something sinister to me. My non-wiki life involves working as a camera operator so it might just be the breaking of framing conventions that I find so unsettling. Anyway, good luck getting your wiki license and may the Lulu administration be better than this one. ntennis 06:49, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks from Lulu[edit]

Storm clouds ...	and silver linings	Thank you for your support on my RfA.
		Unfortunately, it failed to reach consensus. Nonetheless, it proved an opportunity to establish contacts and cooperation with many supportive editors, which will be beneficial to editing Wikipedia in the future. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters (t @)

Erotic emancipation[edit]

Thoughts? Lower ages coincide with higher cultural levels? Countries where the Ottomans levied boys for sexual use seem to be more wary? What do you make of it? Haiduc 00:59, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I should have been more clear: I assumed you were the author of the image, and I was trying to prod you into a response to my questions on the associated talk page. I wanted clarification on a couple of points there and suggested a couple of changes. Thanks :) ntennis 02:00, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-automated link sorting[edit]

This page was semi-automatically modified to sort links to Pathoschild in a meaningful way. // Pathoschild (_admin / ^talk) 04:45, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

erotic disenfranchisement?[edit]

Hi, I noticed your edit, making Symonds 17 rather than 18 when he started up with Willie. But his birth date is October 5, 1840, making him 18 through much of tha fall of 1858. What do you make of it? Haiduc 11:46, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't autumn sept-oct-nov in the northern hemisphere? Did you read that they met in autumn? I only used one source, which I already linked on the talk page. I just re-read it and there may be some room for ambiguity: "soon after reading the Phaedrus in March/April 1858, he had fallen head over heels in love with Willie Dyer". I guess "soon after" could stretch for 6 months till his birthday. I think a look at Symonds' diaries would clear it up. I hope I understood your question correctly? ntennis 13:06, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He met the boy at university, and one does not go there till sept/oct as a rule. Even if he met Willie a couple of days before his own 18th birthday, it seems a stretch to say he was 17 during their relationship. I think the preponderance of the evidence makes him 18 until proven otherwise.

On another note, what do you make of the deVere and the Van Keppel removal? Haiduc 13:53, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion copied and continued at the relevant talk page. ntennis 04:39, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK[edit]

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Gay rights in Russia, 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.

--Gurubrahma 16:51, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Child of Deaf Adult[edit]

I have noticed that you are affiliated with sign language in one way or another. The article on CODAs needs quite a bit of work, and I think is an important article to have as a part of Wikipedia. I would like to invite you to participate in making it a better article. — Esprit15d 20:26, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gay rights template[edit]

ApolloCreed at the Help Desk kindly fixed the Gay rights template, I hope anyway. Do horizontal lines still show in Firefox and Safari between the rows of links in templates 8 and 14 as shown below the comparison table at Template talk:Gay rights#Please_give_your_opinions_here:? Wuzzy 01:42, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Socialism and LGBT rights[edit]

I appreciate very much the quality of your work on Socialism and LGBT rights, Scientific-Humanitarian Committee and related articles. Wuzzy 04:25, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou :D ntennis 05:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Homophile[edit]

What was the 1st gay bookstore? It opened in NYC in 1967? Wuzzy 13:42, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to 1967 in gay rights it was the Oscar Wilde Bookshop (the Advocate was founded the same year). ntennis 22:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Wuzzy 23:03, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gay rights opposition[edit]

Is this edit correct? Wuzzy 21:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm only just learning about this period, but the edit seems fine to me. The anonymous editor that made that change (69.6.101.242) also made a number of useful changes to Socialism and LGBT rights. ntennis 22:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gay rights timeline and Gay rights[edit]

Hi Ntennis. I'd like to add an image of 1 or 2 woman LGBT activists to these articles. Emma Goldman would be okay, but her article says nothing about LGBT activism. Could you add it to her article, or is there a better woman to highlight who has an image? Wuzzy 16:45, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gay_liberation.jpg has women activists in it. The problem with using any photo published after 1922 is U.S. copyright law; I think the Gay Lib poster would qualify as fair use if the caption gives it the right context. You could probably find a fair use image of Mädchen in Uniform, which I would argue was a form of activism, or its director Leontine Sagan; here's a publicity photo of her. As for older images, you could probably steal this image of Anna Rüling but it's badly cropped and doesn't have details about where it's from. Most images of Helene Stöcker and Emma Goldman are before 1922, but both were predominantly heterosexual AFAIK, even though they were outspoken defenders of homosexual rights. ntennis 01:20, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That's very helpful. Wuzzy 02:50, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gender[edit]

Ntennis, just to make sure: I certainly didn't think you would engage in warring. But traditionally this page attracts POV-pushers who want to fight for this definition or that. Mind you, I don't have a problem with POV pushers per se, since a lot of good content on WP is contributed by them. But sometimes it becomes inefficient to discuss basic assumptions by editing the very first paragraph. All the best, Arbor 09:48, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries :) ntennis 14:34, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:1979.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:1979.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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.

Sue Anne 03:57, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for listing that at IfD. It has been superseded by another image and should be deleted. ntennis 04:47, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Institute for Sex Research[edit]

Most of the information about the Institute in the article on Magnus Hirschfeld is not included in the article about the Institute. Is the information about the Institute in the Hirschfeld article solid? If so, I think that it should be added to the article on the Institute. Wuzzy 16:43, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I can't vouch for the information there; I didn't write it. ntennis 07:52, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT movements[edit]

For your information, a few other editors have started a project to merge LGBT movements and other articles into Timeline of LGBT history. Wuzzy 13:34, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Social/societal[edit]

Thanks for being sharp about it! I'd been watching that one myself. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 13:10, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou! It's really lovely to get a nice little note like this. I'm going to pass the love around and leave another editor a little compliment now :) ntennis 08:12, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transhumanism[edit]

Sorry if I came off as unfriendly in the discussion on the Transhumanism talk page. My intention was only to debate the issues to see what would come out of the to and fro. I actually thought that your intervention was very useful and that a lot of improvements were made as a result. Thank you for your help, and if I came off as at all uncivil, disrespectful, or even unfriendly, once again I'm truly sorry. I have a bit more to say back on the talk page. Metamagician3000 07:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind words; actually there's no need to apologise. As wikipedia is a hobby that we do for fun (?!), I try to balance "to and fro" debates with some good old fashioned cooperation, and I've had a bit of locking horns lately on other pages. I'm glad you could make use of my little contribution. No doubt I'll check in again some time. :) ntennis 09:15, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. That's a relief. I was a bit concerned. Metamagician3000 12:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Languages in NZ[edit]

Hi Ntennis,

I just saw your adaption of Legal recognition of sign languages, concerning the official languages of NZ. You stated that English is not a real official language of NZ (but rather "de facto"). In the NZSL Bill itself [6], you can read on page 2:

The Bill will declare NZSL to be an official language of New Zealand. The official recognition of NZSL will not affect the status of either of New Zealand’s other 2 official languages, English and Maori, nor will it affect the rights of any other linguistic minorities in New Zealand.

So I don't think the previous statement was wrong. English is an official language, albeit by convention and not by law. But the article did not state how a language was made official, just that it is an official language. So I have reversed your latest change (I hope you don't mind).

All the best, and looking forward to working together on other articles related to sign languages, Jadriaen 23:24, 8 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Yes you are right; thanks for fixing that. Maybe we can state that English is official by convention not by law? (This distinction also illustrates that the new title - "legal recognition" - may be too narrow). ntennis 01:06, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Let's not change the title of the recogntion-article at this time. I'm not too happy with it either, but in the end we'll come up with a better one.

Note: in Dutch, the difference between the two meanings of recognition is quite subtle: one is erkenning (like with sign languages) and the other one is herkenning. The "her-" has the same function as the "re-" in English, so we might try to introduce ecognition? (Just kidding.)

All the best, Jadriaen 10:21, 9 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Nicaraguan Sign Language[edit]

I finally started following the Wikipedia page on Nicaraguan Sign Language. Thanks for your contributions there. As I looked at the history of changes, I see that you mentioned that ISN is not the native name, but that ISN is the widely used acronym. Interesting point, but I think it needs some clarification. I am a researcher who works on this very case, has lived in Nicargaua and worked with members of the Nicaraguan Deaf community, and it is important to note that ISN, or more specifically, Idioma de Señas de Nicaragua, is indeed a locally-chosen or adopted name for the sign language, even if it is written in Spanish. (In the research literature, it is often referred to as NSL, too.) ANSNIC, the national Deaf association in Nicaragua which has only deaf members, used the name Idioma de Señas de Nicaragua themselves when they published their dictionary of their language. Since most of the world doesn't use SignWriting or any other form of transcription that works for sign languages, ISN and Idioma de Señas de Nicaragua are the closest thing we can get to using in print a "native term" for their language. I think your editorial decision to restore the Spanish-language name is the most appropriate option, at least for now.

Best regards,

Rsenghas 23:14, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, you're famous :) It's like a name on a page suddenly came to life! Thanks for clarifying that. It's really valuable to have your input on this subject. I wonder if you could have a look at the Honduras Sign Language article, as it is currently up for deletion due to having almost no content. Perhaps you could add something? Cheers and welcome to wikipedia! —ntennis

Image Tagging for Image:Helene Stoecker on street.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Helene Stoecker on street.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:05, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello automated bot. The copyright tag was supplied when the pic was uploaded. Additional info now on image page. ntennis 11:58, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Oscar Wilde[edit]

I thought you were being sarcastic for a second. (No one ever compliments me for toning down their work!!!) I was actually taking a university seminar on Wilde when the McKenna bio came out, so I remember the reception fairly well, and thought the article here should reflect the general consensus. I don't know how factual or fictional it is, but it hasn't shattered the accepted theories, or at least not just yet. But Wilde was a man of many masks, so a book like McKenna's may only be fitting. --Pastricide! ^{Non-absorbing} 20:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was being sincere! As I wrote it there was a nagging doubt that I was being too uncritical. You edits were spot on. ntennis 08:28, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kinesics[edit]

Thank you for your comments on the Kinesics talk page. To me the question you asked me together with some of the work you've already done on these topics shows a sincere interest and intent to maintain quality standards. That is why I chose to message you personally. It is ironic that Kinesics started off as a stub with the definition "Non-verbal behaviour related to movement, either of any part of the body or the body as a whole." I don't know much about synergology, just the synergologist in the documentary that I watched was studying the physical interactions of two people (one male, one female). The name of the person studying the two people was Philippe Turget. I don't know much about NVC, but it is something I would like to learn more about.

At this point, I don't have any ideas for how to organise these topics, but I'm willing to help out wherever, as I'm sure you are. Again thank you for response. Dessydes 00:10, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have an idea - see the Talk:Kinesics page. :) ntennis 02:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, good ideas, lets get started as soon as possible. Do you want non-verbal communication as a category and a topic, or just as a topic? Dessydes 02:24, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like your enthusiasm! I didn't think of a category, but it's not a bad idea actually. Maybe both? Anyway, this discussion should continue in a public forum where other interested editors can join in. I've put some more thoughts at the Kinesics talk page. ntennis 03:13, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT social movements[edit]

I'm fine with the name change, so long as we eventually have an article titled Gay rights or Gay rights movement which covers that LGBT social movement specifically. LGBT social movement seems to me like a perfectly adequate title for an overview, but a perfectly inadequate title for an article covering the gay rights movement. I dunno - I'm kind of cranky with this whole Orwellian move to erase the term "gay rights" even when we're talking about something called the "gay rights movement", and with the underlying assumption that always seems to be there (except for that bizarro interaction on Template talk: Gay rigts) that gay rights = special rights, and increasingly unable to deal with it in a civil manner. -Smahoney 18:51, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cisgender[edit]

Thank you for adding the peer reviewed source!!! I have actually been looking for one recently! Best, Kukini 21:44, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ntennis in the ether[edit]

This is personal (hope the wiki nazis don't get me). Nice to see you on screen at least. Your still SO active. yay. It has been many years now! Maybe I should try find you thru Bethany. ----- I was searching for film-making sites and I had a sudden idea to typed your name into google + here you are - wow - LOVE - David - contact me if you would like to -<gypsyfreedomrose@hotmail.com> DjidiDjidi 13:22, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tanzler[edit]

There is still lost to add to the story . Try looking online at http://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN0595275338&id=ptMZLu_YC3UC&printsec=titlepage&dq=The+Secret+of+Elena's+Tomb&sig=MyNDDpoc3hY1roLEKefQqOtNOiM

Citing the Bible[edit]

When researching what has been discussed on Wikipedia re citing the Bible, I came across comments you made on the subject. So I thought I'd inform you of the discussion we are having at Wikipedia:Citing sources/Bible in case you would like to contribute. --Trödel 07:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fabulous! Thankyou :) ntennis 09:00, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Hey, thanks for figuring out what was wrong with that messed-up sentence in LGBT Rights Movements. I couldn't figure it out so I decided to leave it for someone else... ^_^;; Kasreyn 01:33, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. Sometimes when people revert, they only look at the last edit. Pages with LGBT subjects attract a lot of vandalism, so it's generally wise to look in the history. Cheers (^_~) ntennis 02:11, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

answered[edit]

--Yurik 14:50, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SPUSA linkspam[edit]

Hi Ntennis. Thanks for the "Defender of the Wiki". I'll admit to being a little frustrated about the whole thing. I don't have anything against Socialist Party USA, so I'm always a bit conflicted when removing links... but really! I see there is more today. I've been tempted to start a discussion at the SPUSA page, and maybe it would filter down to the anon. But I'm not too optomistic about that, and I don't want to offend the regular editors there, who I'm sure are just going about their regular thing. Any ideas? Cheers.--Bookandcoffee 21:00, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is frustrating. These anons are on a crusade! I'm always amazed that spam is effective in doing anything but putting people off-side. Then again, I feel like that about advertising in general, so I guess I'm out of touch with the masses... :P I reckon our evangelist probably sees a conspiracy of anti-socialist censorship against them, and thinks they are fighting the good fight. One of my objections to it is actually the US-specific nature of the link when added to articles of global relevance; this is a common problem with editors from the US!

I think your idea of a note on the SPUSA talk page is a good one, and with a bit of diplomatic wording, I'm sure it can be done without offending anyone. However, I wouldn't hold out too much hope that such action will end the flood of linkspam. I'm not sure what processes are in place to combat anonymous troublemakers with dynamic IP addresses; I don't think an administrator would agree to semi-protection of the affected pages, as there are so many of them. I added an entry to Wikipedia:Long term abuse#Serial SPAMmers. Perhaps the Counter-Vandalism Unit or Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism have some ideas? I might add something to the talk page there. ntennis 02:39, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's some more fun for you: 83.131.108.69 (talk · contribs). ntennis 15:48, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK I put the following note on the talk:left-wing politics page. I'm afraid I may have lost my delicacy after removing dozens more of these links, but we can modify it to make it more diplomatic and friendly, and place it on some key lefty pages if you like. Hopefully, as other editors become aware of this "serial spammer", the job of cleaning this up won't fall on the shoulders of just a few of us. BTW, the ssame editor appears to occasionally spam IWW links too. I left most of these, as at least the organisation is international, but they should probably go too.

SPUSA spammer

An anonymous editor (or editors) with similar IP numbers has persistently added links to the Socialist Party USA website and the wikipedia page on the organisation. These links number in the hundreds to any article on a social issue, such as black power, and are re-added repeatedly after they've been removed by other editors. Numerous wikipedians have added warnings to these anon talk pages. I encourage other editors to be mindful of this "serial spammer" and consider whether these links (to a single US-specific organisation) belong in articles about global issues. The anon sometimes justifies additions to pages on subjects as diverse as pacifism, direct action, council communism, marxism, leninism, trotskyism, shachtmanism, sparticism, etc. by claiming that SPUSA contains members or "currents" that follow these traditions. They also add links to any labor issue ("labor caucus of SPUSA"), racism ("people of color caucus of SPUSA"), religious article ("SPUSA faith commission"), queer ("queer commission"), feminist etc etc.

They are usually in the "see also" and "external links section, but sometimes, the same editor removes content critical of the SPUSA, or adds links in the body of the article (e.g. this diff, this diff and this diff). Occasionally these links may be considered legitimate, but the vast majority are things like "the SPUSA cares about this issue too" (e.g. this diff). It's hard to tell if they are honestly trying to promote the group or turn people against it! The editor/s have used the the following IP addresses, among others:

ntennis 04:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a member of the SP-USA, it's doubly frustrating (and embarrassing) for me. I wasn't aware of the problem until I started watching Frank P. Zeidler just before your recent edit. I'll start keeping an eye out for more of this stuff. My guess is it's well-intentioned stupidity, though it is curious that all those IPs are registered to Croatia and the UK. Could they be proxies? On the assumption of good faith, I'll see if I can come up with some message to leave on the talk pages to get him/them to stop, or at least talk with me. Success would depend, of course, on the same IP being used again in the future, but I may get lucky. I'll get to it tomorrow, since it's past 03:00 where I am.

PS. Mike Dillon (talk · contribs) claims on the Boxcar Betty AfD that 82.35.70.213 is named Dan and sometimes uses Njeznirevolucionar (talk · contribs). I'll see if Mike can help me get in touch with him. If this anon is an active member of the SP, I may be able to talk with him in person at our conference next week, if need be. -David Schaich ^Talk/_Cont 07:06, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm so pleased to get your note! Thanks for the information and offer of action. It gives me hope that wikipedia is not so vulnerable after all, when defended by an organised community! :) If you want to get a message directly to the anonymous editor, I guess you need to catch them in the middle of a session. Will keep my eyes open and inform u if I notice any more activity. I've got a lot of pages on my watchlist now, after my recent clean up! Best wishes, ntennis 14:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's my impression as well, but I figure it can't hurt to leave notes everywhere appropriate. Speaking of which, I've found another one: 83.131.107.37 (talk · contribs). -David Schaich ^Talk/_Cont 15:13, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I went ahead and left a short note at Talk:Socialist Party USA. Feel free to add to it or reword it if needed.--Bookandcoffee 19:08, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, your note was much better than mine. Well done! Let's see if the problem persists, and if so, copy it to a few talk pages (with a modified third paragraph of course). ntennis 23:09, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I might have gotten lucky a couple of days ago, when I sent the message to the Croatian ip 89.172.57.71 (talk · contribs) only five minutes or so after it edited the SP-USA article. I didn't receive any response, but we'll see if things slack off in the future. While I was looking around I noticed five other likely candidates, all but one Croatian ips interested in the SP-USA and not much else. Most of them haven't done any linkspamming, so I don't feel a burning desire to put them up on the long-term abuse report page, but I'll list them here, as much for my own reference as anything else: 89.172.58.55 (talk · contribs), 86.141.48.42 (talk · contribs), 83.131.106.162 (talk · contribs), 83.131.99.251 (talk · contribs), and 83.131.96.97 (talk · contribs). The (excellent) note left of the SP-USA talk page should also help, since this guy seems to watch that article very closely, and 86.141.48.42, at least, has edited its talk page. -David Schaich ^Talk/_Cont 01:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks David. So far all is quiet on the 65-or-so pages from which I've removed the SPUSA links. ntennis 05:26, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

disdain and distrust[edit]

It is impossible to generalize this way about Buddhism, because while some hinayana schools may well take a path of purification and see sexuality as impure, mahayana schools may be neutral or positive towards it, and varjrayana schools may actaully employ sexual techniques to energize practice and consciousness. Cheers, Haiduc 03:44, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's have content discussions on the article's talk page. Thanks. ntennis 03:50, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Macassan_prau.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Macassan_prau.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. ntennis 01:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Boston Tea Party[edit]

Howdy, I noticed that you and I seem to post in one or two articles dealing with progressive issues in political science/sociology. There's currently a debate beginning in Boston Tea Party as to whether the article should include the category [7]. It meets definitions set in the articles Terrorism and Definition of terrorism, however, there are several self-proclaimed patriots who watch BTP who refuse to recognise the fact. The simple criteria for terrorism generally seem to be intimidation or destruction of property in order to change public policy or public opinion while a state of war has not yet been declared. Some users would rather use recent acts of terrorism as a yardstick, rather than using a firm definition, and hence lose their ability to discuss matters calmly. Would you be able to pop in to the Talk page and join in the discussion? Thanks much, samwaltz 04:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invitiation. Hope you don't mind, but I don't know enough about the Boston Tea Party to make an informed contribution to the discussion. Sorry! Good luck though. ntennis 07:33, 22 August 2006 (UTC) P.S. If you want to link a category in wikitext, put a colon in front like this: [[:Category:Terrorist incidents in the United States]]. It comes out like this: Category:Terrorist incidents in the United States. Just in case you didn't know! :) ntennis 07:36, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Small Favor[edit]

I got a message from you about translating the "without love, we perish" to Nepali. I can spare some of my free time if the work is interesting to me. bye Aaniyo 08:05, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User_talk:Rebecca#Concerns[edit]

You previously posted concerns on User_talk:Rebecca. You may want to comment at User_talk:Rebecca#Concerns.-- Jreferee 22:47, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays ![edit]

You may want to consider endorsing this petition: User_talk:Friday#Petition_to_recall_User:Friday_from_the_position_of_admin. StuRat 13:45, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation![edit]

Hello! I have been running into your edits all over the wiki and would be delighted if you would join WikiProject LGBT studies. Hope you accept! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 09:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou! Unfortunately I can't accept the invitation as I'm not really an active wikipedian any more. After a couple of years and several thousand edits, I guess I became frustrated and began to feel that most of my energies were spent battling ideologues rather than improving articles. It might have something to do with the fact that I was most interested in the intersection of sex, religion and politics.... ;) Anyway, best of luck with the project and feel free to contact me any time if you want to discuss articles I've worked on or related topics. ntennis 07:57, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that is a shame, I'm sure you would have been a great asset to the project. But it's your choice - if you ever become more active I hope you will reconsider! Thank you for your reply. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 08:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deaf-mute[edit]

Hi Ntennis. I'm seeking opinions and possible support for an issue in which I'm in a debate with other Wikipedians. I'm trying to change indiscrimant use of the term "deaf-mute" in describing deaf people in general. To see some comments related to the issue, see Talk:The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter, as well as my own Talk page, User talk:Ward3001. You can also follow the links to other discussions. Right now I'm about the only person addressing the issue because deaf people are such a small minority. Other Wikipedians, with apparently no prior knowledge of the issue, are reverting my edits. If you're interesting in expressing your opinion, feel free to do so. If you wish to discuss further please leave me a message on my Talk page. Thanks. Ward3001 17:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've replied on your talk page. ntennis 22:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply[edit]

Actually I don't think I described it as widespread opposition, but there was more opposition on the Babel article. But I was able to resolve that one peacefully (so far) by discussing with one of the reverters. On The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter there was only one main reverter, but that one was EXTREMELY tenacious, which is when I sought outside help. It was me against one other person, but I felt certain that there were other Wikipedians who understood the issue and would object to use of the term. Regarding whether deaf-mute is used in the novel The Heart is a Lonely Hunter, I've never read the novel, but I saw the film many years ago and can't remember if the word was used. To me, though, that is beside the point. I wouldn't mind "deaf-mute" being used if it is a quote from the film/novel. My objection was in the Wikipedia editor's use of the term to describe a character with no indication whatsoever that the character is literally mute. Actually, I also don't like use of the word mute in general (not in the context of deafness), although it is used in professional literature. I think more enlightened professionals simply say "does not speak" or something similar.

As for other articles with the term "deaf-mute", I've had trouble finding them, but I feel certain there are others. The article for the Stephen King novel The Stand uses the term, but that character was such an unrealistic deaf person that I haven't made an issue over it in that article.

I think most Wikipedians don't care one way or the other, unless they have an axe to grind or they feel it's important to indicate that a deaf person does not talk. That was the problem with Babel; I think some editors felt that it was a critical element in the film that a deaf character did not talk. Fortunately, that one was settled by my discussing my objections with an editor.

Hope this answers some of your questions. Thanks for your help. Ward3001 00:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note regarding mediation[edit]

24.0.97.119 ignored the mediation request (neither agreeing nor disagreeing), yet continues to revert "deaf" to "deaf-mute". Please continue to monitor The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter. If this continues, I will ask everyone's opinion about seeking formal arbitration from Wikipedia. Arbitration results in a binding decision. Thanks. Ward3001 00:36, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Deaf[edit]

I notice you are a member of WikiProject Deaf. You may also add {{User WikiProject Deaf}}, which also adds a userbox to your page, or [[Category:WikiProject Deaf participants]] to your userpage. If you do, it will list you in Category:WikiProject Deaf participants. Taric25 19:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added you to Category:WikiProject Deaf participants. Taric25 15:11, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Front homosexuel d'action révolutionnaire[edit]

Hi, I just created this page so your redirect can now go to it... (I think lowercase works, but, we can always move the page over the redirect). I would caution you not to make too many redirects... for instance... Arcadie redirects to homophile... which is kind of like redirecting Sears Tower to building... it gives a false representation of how many articles we have since and makes it hard for people to realize they need to create new articles. I only managed to translate some of the FHAR article from the French since... my French isn't very good. If you can / want to translate more then maybe there will be enough content to get it on the main page. gren グレン 23:44, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Thanks for starting this article. ntennis 05:51, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and sorry to make you do that twice[edit]

[8] I wasn't paying attention. Tom Harrison ^Talk 20:30, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem :) Happy editing. ntennis 00:34, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Arcadie cover 1975.jpg[edit]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Arcadie cover 1975.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

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 19:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Gay Left journal cover 1978-1979.jpg[edit]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Gay Left journal cover 1978-1979.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

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 10:12, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Gay Activist June 1971.jpg[edit]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Gay Activist June 1971.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

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 10:12, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Mattachine Review May-June 1955.jpg[edit]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Mattachine Review May-June 1955.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 04:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:ONE magazine cover.jpg[edit]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:ONE magazine cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 05:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:The Ladder, October 1957.jpg[edit]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:The Ladder, October 1957.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 07:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:The Ladder May 1966.jpg[edit]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:The Ladder May 1966.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 07:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Symonds-a problem in greek ethics.gif[edit]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Symonds-a problem in greek ethics.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 04:57, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Gay_Liberator_magazine_cover_April_1974.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Gay_Liberator_magazine_cover_April_1974.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Alpta 15:59, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Linsert_reissue_book_cover.JPG[edit]

I have tagged Image:Linsert_reissue_book_cover.JPG as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Alpta 16:00, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gay_Left_journal_cover_1978-1979.jpg[edit]

I have tagged Image:Gay_Left_journal_cover_1978-1979.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Alpta 16:00, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Mattachine Review May-June 1955.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Mattachine Review May-June 1955.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:11, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deafblindness[edit]

I think your recent edit reduced the accuracy of the sentence. Every deaf-blind person I have known who uses sign will express themselves in the same way that other signers do. It's only when others are signing to them that it becomes tactile. Thus, I think the description "supplemented by a tactile version of Sign used by others to communicate with the deafblind person" is more accurate. I wanted to know your thought before I revert. Thanks. Ward3001 22:55, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK will reply on your talk page. ntennis 23:33, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, the article talk page is a better place to have the discussion. OK with u? ntennis 00:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

macassans[edit]

May i ask you, who are Macassans?

That's because i found it was you who created redirect from there to Macassar... And i still cannt realize to which group of ppl belongs the name... I guess 'population of the wide area surrounfing-associated with the city'? Or citizens of some kingdom ('kings' are mentiones in the article)? Or.... just fishers from around Sulavesi and some other islands?:( I'm trying to understand who exactly did come in contact with aboriginal ppl... I found some clue at your page:) - the article about their contact. Well... i'm a reader. I think sometimes readers may ask editors:) may we?

Konstantin, Russia. Just I'm hearing 1st time about the contact. -83.237.27.238 (talk) 04:31, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's lovely to get a comment from a reader! :) Unfortunately I can't give you a definitive answer. :( I believe the Makassars are a language/cultural group from South Sulawesi (see Makassar language). Those who made contact with the peoples of northern Australia were fishers and traders from this group. I'm out of time today but i'll try to look into it in more depth soon! Also, please let me know what you find too. ntennis 05:07, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

p.s Yes, I was surprised when I first read about it too! I'm from Australia and they never taught us this at school... ntennis 05:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, 'reader' is just my role:) Surely, if it were not my English, i would edit wiki too. (for some reasons i don't and probably won't edit Russian wiki) May be that's good - i may learn 'how do not engage in controvercies at talkpages' before i did:) It's not simple task even when you do know it's a bad idea:)

Did you read the work of MacKnight? Or you just noticed (as did myself) that it's widely cited?

Yes, i thought i know about Australia much more than 'tis where Aborigenes killed and had eaten captain Cook' (as i was informed at the age of 3:)) and 'that's where ppl (antipodes) walk with their heads downwards' (Lewis Carroll) since childhood... And I was surprized. Now i'm surprized even more with you, Australians, knowing nothing too:) Now it seems just logical - Timor (e.g.) isn't far away from you, many thousands of years are passed from the time when the Austronesians began to disperse through both of the oceans.

And Indonesia was a hotspot of the trade many years before europeans arrived. They even write poems based on Mahabharata at the courts of their rajas 1000 y. ago (on Java).

It's a wonder that contact wasn't established before! 4,3,2,1 thousands y.ago. --83.237.109.187 (talk) 11:24, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

well, thank you! I'll try to get more info:) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.237.109.187 (talk) 11:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another qustion. Are you open to off-topic conversations? Regarding your personality (thogh not your person), may be... I mean deaf ppl and your interest in them. That was the thing l often thought about 2-3 yeras ago. I thought about this again after reading the paper where i read first about macassans (coincidenetally just when i was asking you here:)). So my interest renewed and i find it natural to ask now (after taking a look at your page:) I'm just curious person now, not The Reader, of course:)

The article is here: http://www.uog.ac.pg/PUB08-Oct-03/har.htm

It's a scan in a poor quality... about aboriginal counting. I found it very funny:) (but i have very strange sense of humor). Dont sure you'll find it interesting. It's not about deaf ppl at all, just a deaf girl mentioned once and non-verbal counting discussed. The paper provoked some interesting thoughts in myself. (p.s. excuse me:))--83.237.109.187 (talk) 14:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that article, I found it very interesting! I'd be happy to chat with you about it and the other things you mentioned. However, this talk page is not the best place to do it. Perhaps email, IM chat, or another internet space? Do you have a home page? ntennis 10:36, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S I just read the Pirahã language article - there's some interesting things said about the lack of counting in Pirahã language and culture. After reading the article you linked above, I find I'm a little suspicious about the assumptions of the researcher! ntennis 12:49, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ntennis[edit]

I responded to your request on [Federation of the Deaf talk page]. I noticed you haven't responded, but have instead reverted my change. I'll leave your revert as is, but please respond to the discussion you initiated. Thanks. KoshVorlon ".. We are ALL Kosh..." 14:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've left a comment there. By the way, you can link to a talk page like this: [[Talk:World Federation of the Deaf]]. Also, you might want to have a look at the Kurzweil Music Systems article. :) ntennis 05:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Mona ahmed book cover.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Mona ahmed book cover.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) 22:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Mona ahmed book cover.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Mona ahmed book cover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 22:03, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:User sgn-2 old[edit]

A tag has been placed on Template:User sgn-2 old requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:46, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ONE magazine cover April-May 1956.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:ONE magazine cover April-May 1956.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:29, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:The Ladder, October 1957.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:The Ladder, October 1957.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:05, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Mattachine Review 1959.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Mattachine Review 1959.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 03:24, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Thirdsex bookcover 1959.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Thirdsex bookcover 1959.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 14:50, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]