User talk:DialUp

Welcome[edit]

Hey, DialUp, welcome to Wikipedia. I'm pretty new myself as a committed editing member. I just wanted to note that it might be better to address questions and suggestions to others on their Talk page, as I'm doing to you. I specifically refer to your comment to Radiant! regarding the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children article. You will note on Radiant!'s talk page that I have made some suggestions in the same regard.

Looking forward to seeing more of your work here!

HyperZonk^talk 19:04, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)

re: Nez Perce Stake Race[edit]

Good evening. Per your research which found that article to be a copyright violation, I am deleting the article and closing the VfD discussion. Per some of the opinions expressed in the VfD discussion, please consider first whether this topic would be better discussed in the context of some other article before recreating it as a stub. (I have no personal opinion on the matter.) Thanks. Rossami (talk) 06:24, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Sikh pages[edit]

Thanks for your dedicated work on sorting and categorising many pages relating to Sikhism, and especial thanks for your edits to Sikh pages; you have turned a fairly redundant list into a valuable, structured index of information. Great work. -- FP 08:26, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Dialup, I have looked at the Sikh Pages and I must say you have done an excellent job - Keep it up! If you need to contact me please email me or post on my talk page. Unfortunately, I only check wikipedia about once a month. Hari Singh 18 April 2005

Hi Dialup, Thanks for the message - I will keep a look out whenever I log into Wiki - I have been spending time on Sikhiwiki - Have you seen it yet? Keep up the good work, --Hari Singh 21:36, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

American West[edit]

The debate is geting long, and I think a lot of misunderstanding is going on, so I'm posting here. We don't agree on everything but I think there is enough common ground to hope for an amicable resolution. I don't oppose an article "American West," if it is going to be about the iconic west or the idea of the West, rather than the modern region. The U.S. West article predates American West which was a redirect to it. Since U.S. West has been moved to Western United States- it is the American West that is the newer article.

The main region articles are intended to be holistic in nature covering: geograhy, culture, history, politics, ect. as well as discuss variations with in the region and what may or may not be included in the region. So the information in a rewritten American West article should be included to some extint. In this sense an article about the iconic West would have a paragraph or so in the Western United States with a link to the main article of American West at the top of the section.

The current verison of American West is not solely about the West as an iconic region, but presents it more as an authoritative source on what the West is now. In its current form it only discusses one of several diffentions for what the region is today, and only touches briefly on the iconography. If it was changed to discuss the icongraphy of the West, the importance of the idea of a Western Frontier in American history, and the evolution of that idea, ect. I see no reason why it would need to be either a redirect or a disambig page, since it would cover a topic not covered by an existing article.

As for the map, I'm a geography person so I know the differing regional models by heart. You can see some of the various interpretations of the region in the links I provided in the Food for thought section. I also took Jmabel's conerns into question per the Pacific states, because I was already aware of that idea. I'm willing to make changes to the map, but let's work out the articles first. -JCarriker 19:12, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

I can assure you that it is the agenda of the project memebers such as Jmabel, and myself is to come up with the best article available. Texas and California not only will be included in Western United States, they already are there. If you still have doubts, join the project and you'll be notified of what the project is doing. -JCarriker 09:25, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

One more thing, in regards to Houston— its' a swamp. Downtown Houston sits on Buffalo Bayou several of Houstons nicknames include the Bayou City and Magnolia City. The 19th century cattles trails, and thus cowboys, were not part of the history or culture of East Texas. As such any claims to that from East Texas cities is just posing. Rodeo is a sport, Houston having a large rodeo no more makes it a part of the modern American West, than does Calgary's. I you want an example of a Western city in Texas, use Fort Worth— you won't be disapointed ;) I am a Texan so I can speak from experience about it. In your comments you sound as if you will not continue participating in the debate. I would urge you to reconsider, as the discussion with you has been productive, while it hasn't with CPret. - JCarriker 17:05, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

My comments were meant to be humorous, but they are not a joke. My point about Calagary was that it was not part of the United States, making it not part of the American West. As for the Allen Ranch never heard of it, but I've created a stub on it if you care to expand it. If you look up Houston's nick you will find that they are true. I hope you noticed the bits in the webpage about the Allen ranch about bayou this and bayou that, as well as about the Southern plantation. As I have said previously I do not object to Texas being classed as a Western State, I object to it always being classed as one which is a defunct geographic classificaton. That said let me ask a direct question— Do you object to Texas being classed in other regions? If so why? -JCarriker 14:11, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

As I hinted at in my first post I am willing to see regions overlap. I don't see why we should be limited to cookie cutter regions, especially when that's not what exists in reality. -JCarriker 11:03, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Also when I mean posing I mean stuff like this] which annoys most East Texans— where the population is at. Please take the time to read this book review by a West Texas Newspaper the Desert Mountain Times, Texas' old South roots run deep and let me know what you think of both links. -JCarriker 14:34, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC) (revised 16:07, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC))

I think it is unfortunate that this debate is taking place, as I said no one is opposing what you want to include. I had to learn Texas history at a young age, it is a required 7th grade course here— further more being proficient in Texas History is a requirment for my college major. I am knowledgable about Texas History, more over I have access to oral history considering that my family has lived in Texas before the Texas Revolution. Texans know what Texas is (just look at the Southern Notice board membership), further more no Southerner is trying to deny Texas' Western heritage, and I certainly hope you are not trying to do the reverse. I see that anything I provide is going to be discounted so I will not be continuing this dialouge. Now if you'll excuse me, Cat and Watermelon awaits me on my front porch where I can view the Wisteria, Kudzu, Magnolias, and Gardenias in my yard. Goodbye sir, I'll alert you when the WikiProject discusses the categories. -JCarriker 15:55, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

If I were you I would be more careful in my use of words such as dissembling. I have acknowledged your points, even created an article on one of them. I know what I amm talking about and you obviously do not think that I do— thus I have come to the realization that you are going to reject anything I to say and as such my efforts are better directed elsewhere. So long as you continue to dismiss rather than discuss my points, do not post on my talk page. You will be welcome again if you choose to discuss the issue rather than dismiss everything I have to say out of hand. By the way, that book is considered the most authoritative modern work of Texas History by Texana scholars- it does not make cases it states facts. -JCarriker 17:11, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

Fine, I'll answer you here. Let's get some things straight. It was you that called me back into this discussion and it wasn't to discuss issues. You asked my opinion of a news article about a place I've never been and my opinion of someone's review of a book I've never read. That's what you got. Again, I'm sorry if my opinions are not what you wish, but everyone is entitled to personal opinions that do not agree with your own. Lastly, it was my own lack of ability to give an informed opinion I was speaking about, not your's. Some things I am sure of; I never intentionally attacked you, threatened you, or lectured you. DialUp 15:45, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- "I never intentionally attacked you, threatened you, or lectured you." I'll accepted that. Further more if I have failed to make myself clear, and have seemed at times unreasonable I apologize, likewise it was not by design. You've said that you're sketchy on Texas history, but let me explain a brief, but useful, note about my culture (which does not encompass all of Texas) and should be useful to you in the future as well as give you some insight into my reaction to your last two posts. Being Southern, entails its own culture,— a bond strengthened by a common history and to a lesser extint, geography. Native Southerners treat being Southern like an ethnicty (many of them would argue it is)- through this context claiming someone isn't Southern, as I originally interpreted your latter posts to mean, is like claiming someone is not Jewish, Mexican, or Irish, and a strong negative reaction can always be expected. However as my grandmother says, "There is no excuse for rudeness (on my part)." This all boils down to one yes or no question Do you object to Texas being included in regions that are not part of the West? If the answer to that question is no I see no reason why we can't work together, if the answer is yes then I'm afraid there is no point in continuing our conversation. -JCarriker (originally) June 29, 2005 09:18 (UTC)/ (revised) July 8, 2005 21:48 (UTC)

Please vote in what to do with American West survey on Talk:American West. Thanks. -JCarriker 21:16, July 9, 2005 (UTC)

VFD[edit]

CPret has posted American West on Vfd. You can vote at it's entry page. -JCarriker 17:53, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

Invitation to view new maps[edit]

WikiProject U.S. regions is considering a proposal on its maps page to replace the current grab bag of U.S. maps with a standardized style. The new maps also remove the always, sometimes, and rare classification currently in use, in favor of a core area always in a region highlighted in red, while states that may or may not be included in a region are shown in pink. You are invited to comment and/or join as a participant. Please comment on the map page's talk page. If approved or revised by participants, I'd like to make the transition within the next two weeks, (I plan on making your topic of Categories (not just the Western ones at the center of the Coordinator's agenda after that maps have been implemented and/or revised). (P.S. Don't worry too much about Globeism. Personally, I have no more intention of seeing Texas or other states in a similar position being locked out of the West any more than I do seeing them locked into it, and I'm sure others who voted to redirect feel the same way.) BTW on Talk:American West, what did you mean by "when it's completed", did you mean the vote on the talk, the Vfd, Western United States, or something else? Thanks. -JCarriker|Talk 05:57, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

Am. West Vfd closed[edit]

I have closed the Vfd with consensus to keep, and I've redirected the article per the vote on the talk page. As such "it's completed" so if you'd like to take up the issue of the dubious material please repost your concerns at Talk:Western United States. -JCarriker 18:33, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

Maps[edit]

Hey DialUp, I saw that you added an external link of different maps for one of the town articles I added to Wikipedia and I was wondering if you could show me how you did that. I wanted to add them to all the locations in Hampshire County, West Virginia. Thanks! Caponer 02:45, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, I saw the template and figured it out, was having a blonde moment I guess...thanks for respondin' ;) Caponer 19:54, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Sikh practices[edit]

Orphaned non-free image File:Guru Nanak through Pictures.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Guru Nanak through Pictures.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:17, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Sikh history[edit]

Category:Sikh history, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:25, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Life of Guru Nanak through Pictures for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Life of Guru Nanak through Pictures is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Life of Guru Nanak through Pictures until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Redtigerxyz ^Talk 09:50, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox western riding timed event[edit]

Template:Infobox western riding timed event has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:57, 17 December 2014 (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) 12:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]