User talk:Ebear422/Archive

Archived December 13, 2004: ;Bear 02:31, 2004 Dec 14 (UTC)

Welcome[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia! Your energy and knowledge will be of great use here. As you settle in with this community, please take a look (you may have read some of them already) at some pages to further your understanding of the community, and the wikipedia project:

Keep up the good work! Kingturtle 07:06, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

My editing your user page[edit]

Hi again. (We exchanged msgs abt Rhee in the last 24.)
I try to think long and hard before editing someone else's user page (as opposed to their talk page), but i figured you'd

probably feel it was an edit "friendly" to your conception of the page, and
not hesitate to revert it if i had erred.

My little trick of getting two links out of a single institution's name is not something i recall seeing anyone else do (and i actually seldom use it unless i don't want to take time to make a stub out of the more specific term), so don't take my example too seriously.
I was particularly pleased to find that you did write an article for your local NWR, bcz i was noticing New England NWRs last nite when i started the stub for List of U.S. national forests in order to eliminate a year-long "red link". That could be a mere coincidence, or an idea you got by looking at my User contributions after we discussed Rhee; either would be fully in the WP spirit of benefiting from random connections.
I'm pleased you're liking this place; hope to see more of you. [smile]
--Jerzy (t) 18:33, 2004 Apr 6 (UTC)

Taboo words[edit]

Hi. Yes you're right about the word spastic having undergone a relatively recent change in acceptability. There's a nice discussion of this sort of thing at euphamism. I think it's because the word began to be used as an insult, and this tainted it's use as a medical/neutral word. There used to be a charity shop in my hometown which sold donated items to raise money for the Spastics Society. I always remember reading this name with some discomfort or amusement as a child (I'm 22, by the way) because the word was already a taboo. The charity renamed itself ten years ago and is now called SCOPE. Of course this happens with all words. If you delve back into the history of cunt and fuck they have innocent enough beginnings, and in the case of fuck at least, are today becomming less taboo. Fascinating stuff. :) fabiform | talk 11:17, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

from da pump[edit]

How the heck do you edit a redirect? Meanshile this page is WAAAY too long. ;Bear 05:22, 2004 Apr 7 (UTC)

Ask a developer nicely →Raul654 05:48, Apr 7, 2004 (UTC)

No, you just click on the link when it says "Redirected from ..." and then click Edit this page. Dysprosia 05:52, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The only exception to this is if the page redirects to another site, or to the Special: namespace, in which case no such text appears. In that case, you have to manually construct a URL of the form http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=REDIRECT_NAME_HERE&redirect=no - IMSoP 12:58, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

See also wikipedia:redirect and meta:redirect. Martin 18:26, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Manual of Style[edit]

Hi, if you have time could you voice feedback on the bottom of Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style , the Country and City Sovereignty item. THanx for any time.Daeron 13:39, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Peer Review Please[edit]

Hi, you were kind enough the other week to give comment on the Manual of Style : Talk page; could you review the article that John & Wik keep reverting over at Papua (Indonesian province) : Page history -- My version speaks for itself; different maps, more content, and honest facts not twisted racist non-sense. THeir version paints Papuans as dumb blackmen lead around by a Reverend with a sing-song (please compare that paragraph to mine). Their version also removes the vital links to the US State Dept. document & the letter from JFK, without which US readers may have difficultly understanding why their government did what it did at that time.

Also they keep reverting over West Papuan Genocide - a perfectly good article that they apparently hate because the Yale University uses the term West Papua which they have expunged from their version at [[Human rights violations in western New Guinea]] and many other articles. I'm hoping some peer review may stop Wik and friend.

They accuse me of POV, which I feel their article is loaded with where-as my article avoids any POV by simply listing known facts and allowing readers to form their own thoughts. Even Tannin explained that to them but it goes in one ear & out the other apparantly. Also English language users can really only search the Internet for the country title "West Papua", as Papua would only return PNG & New Guinea pages. The current Indonesian name of the region is actually Propinsi Papua. The name issue is discussed on the talk page for a waste of time, and the meaning of Papua is even in dictionaries, sometimes even West Papua is. I just wanted to update my West Papua article to match the current Wikipedia standard.Daeron 15:06, 8 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I always have my best thoughts while doing other things.

You focus 100% on your finals & look brilliant, All Best, Aj (aka Daeron). ;-) Daeron 08:14, 11 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Zip Day[edit]

Hi, I noticed your article on Zip Day. I'd like to ask, is this a real holiday? What is your source, and could you add a References section pointing to it? I'm inclined to believe you invented it and put it up for deletion without some evidence. Thanks. Derrick Coetzee 18:57, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I just Googled it. A prominent hit is 4444.com, which home page has front and center "Welcome to Zip City, USA 44444!" But a search of that site for the phrase "zip day" yields nothing. My original source was two members of a family from Newton Falls. (Just noticed, did you? Zip Day is a red link as you have it, with capital D). Anyway, so far everything I've seen on Google appears to have propagated out from my original article.. Ins't that interesting.

Anyway, gimme a couple of days, OK? I have inquiries out. Thanx. ;Bear 23:39, 2004 Oct 15 (UTC)

Preliminary results: ZIP Day _was_ celebrated (how many times I don't yet know) in Newton Falls, but is now deprecated. It should be removed from the April 4 page therefore, and I could do that. The ZIP day page should, if kept (lets see what more thorough info I get), be 1. updated to show past tense; 2. moved to ZIP Day (caps). It might even be revived as a result of my inquiries (to the library first, and by them to local service clubs who were involved). Stranger things have happened. Anyway we'll get to the bottom of this pretty soon. ;Bear 16:03, 2004 Oct 18 (UTC)

Jon Voight[edit]

I've noticed on several articles you've changed "Jon Voight" to "Jon Voigt," even in image names, resulting in broken images. Why is this? Jon Voight receives 117,000 Google results, compared to 3,030 for Jon Voigt. IMDb also lists his name as Jon Voight. [1] You also changed the name in all articles relating to his family members. For instance, on Chip Taylor (Jon Voight's brother), you changed Chip's birth name from John Wesley Voight, to John Wesley Voigt. A Google search for the changed name has one result, and it is a Wikipedia mirror. [2] A search for John Wesley Voight results in many reputable pages with that as his name. [3] Please do not continue changing this. Thank you. - MattTM | talk 08:37, Oct 24, 2004 (UTC)

I see I was wrong and of course enthusiasm is no substitute for accuracy. Sorry about that. I suppose doing a couple of stupid things is sometimes part of the process of maturing as a wikipedian. Mea culpa. Sorry for the bother. ;Bear 15:14, 2004 Oct 24 (UTC)

No problem! I've already changed everything back. - MattTM | talk 16:06, Oct 24, 2004 (UTC)

Town of Taos[edit]

Are you sure that Taos is a city. The town charter says:

3.12.010: FORM OF GOVERNMENT: The town of Taos is incorporated as a general law municipality under the mayor-council form of government, as provided for in chapter 3, New Mexico Statutes Annotated, 1978, as amended. The town was incorporated on May 7, 1934. (Ord. 98-2 § 1, 1998: prior code § 2-1)

It doesn't claim to be a city there. As far as I can tell because that chapter of New Mexico state code is not online, a home rule municipality is what we call a city while general law municipalities are villages and towns. Rmhermen 13:29, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

I lived there for twenty years and I once ran for city council often referred to as town council.

New Mexico statutes are on line in a piecemeal fashion and thus a bit hard to consult. I am going to attempt to get a whole copy of section 3, Municipalities, on paper.

Long term I am concerned that we have so many hamlets and villages all over the US described as cities. 34 people hardly makes a city. Side note, Cerrillos was incorporated and booming in the 19th Century, with at least a couple of thousand people, and shortly after 1900 disincorporated -- the ballot measure for that passed by a vote of six to two. ;Bear 15:49, 2004 Oct 29 (UTC)

I just talked with the New Mexico Municipal League and found that the three terms village, town, city — and no others — are all available by statute for a municipality to call itself, and at its own choice. There is no distinction therein as to the form the government takes. What I was told in 1975 (at the same office, and in person) is not true, at least not now. ;Bear 16:24, 2004 Oct 29 (UTC)

In Michigan, there at least three forms of local government - city, village and charter township. The smallest city (Lake Angelus, Michigan) has only 326 people but is still legally a city. Rmhermen 23:15, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

I know I can't just assume that below a certain threshold a "city" is something else. And just exactly what the word means varies from state to state. Straightening all this out looks like a rather immense project. ;Bear 01:41, 2004 Oct 30 (UTC)

Article Licensing[edit]

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 2000 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:

OR

Option 2

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

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Why is this necessary at all? I PD my photos to make it totally hassle-free in that regard. If I PD all my work and I leave out a jot or tittle and somebody puts one in, and he hasn't licensed his stuff any particular way, what of that? Does it tend to taint the article?

And is the originator's licensing scheme operative through successive substantive contributions? Kinda or partly or what?

The Wikipedia:Multi-licensing page explains this more closely, but it can be very complicated to explain. In general if a non-multi-licensing person edits an article, anything after that point is not multi-licensed, so yeah it "taints" the article. Of course for someone like myself who is willing to go through the work, it is possible to remove the "tainted" portion of the article and use everything that remains. In the end the burden of doing it right is up to the person doing the copying, not the person licensing. So in the worst case multi-licensing is just a bunch of works that don't mean anything in practice. But in the best case scanerio, whole articles can be used without any modification. It's messy and dirty in some cases, but at least you won't have to worry about the details if you don't decide to copy them yourself. I'd say it doesn't hurt to multi-license, but obviously I'm biased. – Ram-Man ^{(comment) (talk)}[[]] 01:23, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)