User talk:Wikibob

History

Hi WikiBob -

Regarding King Herod Death - Another user had mentioned Appianos date correction on the page, which I added the note about Consular Calendar corrections that supported Appianos. Other than that I have no other information on Appianos, though I am going to research him further.

We have all been conditioned to see and perceive one perspective. However, with logic & science the ancient records can be correlated and better understood. My goal is to provide people with logical, factual information so they can make up their own minds.

I have uncovered additional Astro info and have additional reasoning that I will add shortly. Thanks for your helpful comments and guidance.

Dan Onischuk--68.148.210.110 17:05, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Wikibob, how about an update on the timelines for the Mars rovers? Cool stuff is still coming in! Fawcett5 21:15, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I agree, I enjoyed reading those articles and im not knowlegable enough on the subject to update them myself, I would enjoy reading an updated version if anyone were ever to write it. --Timmywimmy 17:08, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Per your comments on Talk:Swastika I have changed the article in a way that I HOPE will cause it to render the same for everyone. Could you check and let me know if it looks ok with your browser? It looks the same on mine either way. Dalf | Talk 06:40, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, could you look at Talk:Rosa Luxemburg. Tks -- Obradović Goran (ta^lk 5 July 2005 16:34 (UTC)

Hi - I see you've added a link to the image I uploaded "Redcly182.jpg". This image came from the Glasgow Digital Library, who initially allowed "non-commercial" usage of their images - which does not fit in with WP policy, and then declined usage when asked if they would licence it as free - so I'm not sure if should remain on WP - all the other images I uploaded have been deleted.

As for the transcript, I was under the impression that WP was not to be used as a source for original text? The Speech from the Dock was summarised from the full speech on this basis.

Your comments would be appreciated. Camillus^{talk|contribs} 04:30, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I did read what the GDL wrote, but as I see it, it falls into the public domain, at least in the USA, because the author died over 70 years ago (1923), and it's a scan of a printed article from 1914. I tried to think of reasons how the GDL could claim copyright or insist on restrictions, for example claiming it is not 2D art, or that the letter was not first published until after 1934 (ie the cutting is some kind of joke), or that the UK had a different copyright term (it largely follows the EU with the 70 years rule), or that it's Crown copyright, but I failed. I used commons:Commons:Licensing to guide me. I also looked at the other images, but due to their more recent age, could not be put into the 70 years bracket (yet). I assume that the GDL's reply is intended to cover all the images that they actually have the copyright to (or those that the owner had granted them a license).

The transcript is on wikisource, which does allow original text, as long as it has a free license (or public domain). The original text was the text of his letter to the newspaper. If the full speech is available somewhere, that too would be eligible for wikisource. And then any other wikimedia project could use derivatives of it as needed. (all this also copied to User talk:Camillus McElhinney) -Wikibob 05:19, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please look at the Heart of Darkness discussion page. Thanks! -Vontafeijos 05:04, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, looking for reviewers for this article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review/Buffer_overflow

It would be great to have lots of input from different sources. - Tompsci 19:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Thanks for intervening above — I really appreciate it! I apologise if it seemed like I was having a conniption fit (hence my many edits in response to the POV ones repreatedly made), but I feel my actions were/are necessary. By the way, is that behaviour what they call trolling?

Anyhow, if you have any added feedback or questions, please let me know. Thanks again! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 23:54, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If reporting this error to the Wikimedia System Administrators, please include the following details: Request: GET http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ad/Piazza_del_Campidoglio.jpg, from 0.0.0.0 via srv6.wikimedia.org (squid/2.5.STABLE12) to upload.wikimedia.org ([unknown]) Error: ERR_CANNOT_FORWARD, errno (11) Resource temporarily unavailable at Fri, 13 Jan 2006 04:04:09 GMT

Hi Wikibob,

Why did you delete Image:AlbinEggerLienzSchnitter.jpg ? On December 17, you listed this on Possibly Unfree Images and wrote "Image:AlbinEggerLienzSchnitter.jpg not disputed, but added created by Albin Egger-Lienz who died 1926". Austrian copyright extends to 70 years after the creator's death. This painting has been in the public domain for quite some time. I hope you usually check more thoroughly before you delete valuable images... And why did you not notify me on my talk page? Do you think people have every last thing they upload on their watchlists? Mstroeck 00:23, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I work with the de:en translations. On our requested articles page St. Petersburg is listed in progress with you as the one to is working on it. But it seems like you haven't touched it in a while. Without having read it all the way through it seems like it's pretty much done, but I'm not sure whether you or anyone else did. If it is done, can you please let me know and we'll remove it from the list. If there is anything left to do on it and you don't have the time please let me know that as well. If you don't know and no longer want to work on it, please let me know that too and I'll return the article status to "unclaimed". It's one of just a couple of requests that were placed in 2004 (!) and if it shouldn't be there anymore, we'd like to get it off the list.  :) Thanks already for taking a look. --Mmounties 00:06, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya. I dunno what source you used, but using data I found at a U-Strasburg page, I made a correction to your expansion (a year ago) of this stub. If you have data that conflicts with that listed at U-Strasburg, perhaps we should look for a third source, or a different example...especially if the goal was to find a star w/ a color index = 0... Cheers, Tomer^talk 05:20, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WikiBob - I was just going through some of the changes since adding my edits in Dec 2005 to King Herods death date. Thank you for reinstating several of my notations which, although controversial at the time, have in fact led us to a clearer understanding that is supported by my earlier notes. I think my notes should also be reflected in the date of the birth of Jesus "wiki-page" - it is now likely Jesus was born either June 17/18 -1 BC or early March year zero. I am disappointed to see after all my groundbreaking independant research, I get zero credit in your refence section. ALthough I have not read the other references noted, more professional courtesy for my efforts & website accessible skymap images (www.parkfoto.com - research link ) would be appreciated. my email is dan_onischuk@hotmail.com cheers ! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.148.111.154 (talk) 04:54, 17 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Per recent discussions, the way in which Persondata is viewed by Wikipedia editors has changed. In order to continue viewing Persondata in Wikipedia articles, please edit your user CSS file to display table.persondata rather than table.metadata. More specific instructions can be found on the Persondata page. --ShakingSpirit^talk on behalf of Kaldari 02:16, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Beslan_siege_rough_plan.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion 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.

Template:GFDL image description has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 03:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

from the mountaneering club with a web portal called Nuestra Montaña,

I visited their site after viewing the movie "Touching the Void" in an attempt to see if anyone else has climbed the western route up the Siulá Grande, and after seeing that there were no images of the mountain on Wikipedia.

While there I found an image of the Siluá Grande from the east and another from the west (the side Joe Simpson and his partner climbed and descended). I read their legal discaimers page (http://www.nuestramontana.com/aviso.html) and found that by contacting them I could request permission to use their images on Wikipedia, so I e-mailed them.

The next morning, they had replied with his:

Hola Antonio, Gracia por escribirnos. Por supuesto que puedes usar nuestra imágenes, pero respetando los créditos respectivos. Sobre la repetición de esa ruta, efectivamente nadie aún la ha hecho, solo hay 2 variantes pero la ruta original de Joe Simpson sigue siendo como tal. Saludos

--- Sergio Ramírez Carrascal Nuestra Montaña SAC Expediciones a las cordilleras Blanca - Huayhuash - Cusco & Sudamérica http://www.nuestramontana.com

In sum, they say that of course I could use the images to post on Wikipedia as long a there is language stating that the images may be downloaded for personal, non-commercial use with a credit that would lead people to their web site.

They also informed me that there are two other routes up the Siulá Grande, but that no one has yet climbed Joe Wilson's and Simon Yates' route up the mountain.

Here is their contact information:

NUESTRA MONTAÑA SAC - EXPEDICIONES DE MONTAÑA - VIAJES AL PERU Y SUDAMERICA Oficina principal : HUARAZ - Jirón 27 de noviembre 659 Huarupampa - Código postal (Zip) 043 / Teléfonos (51 43) 42 5880 - móvil (51 43) 94367 1526 LIMA - Jirón Casma 224 Covida - Lima 39 / Teléfono (511) 523 3594 web@nuestramontana.com / sergioalp@hotmail.com

How can I send you the images? My home e-mail is: santamariaweb.net

Tony Santamaría

Image:Mars first Deimos transit 1P131641517ESF0544P2666R8M1.JPG is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Deimos Mar 04 2004 from Opportunity 4.jpg, Image:Mars first Deimos transit 1P131641497ESF0544P2666R8M1.JPG as Commons:Image:Deimos Mar 04 2004 from Opportunity 2.jpg, Image:Mars first Deimos transit 1P131641507ESF0544P2666R8M1.JPG as Commons:Image:Deimos Mar 04 2004 from Opportunity 3.jpg, Image:Mars Phobos eclipse 1P132176252ESF05A6P2670R8M1.JPG as Commons:Image:Phobos Mar 10 2004 from Opportunity 1.jpg and Image:Mars Phobos Eclipse 1P132176262ESF05A6P2670R8M1.JPG as Commons:Image:Phobos Mar 10 2004 from Opportunity 2.jpg. Commons is a repository of free media that can be used on all MediaWiki wiki's. The image(s) will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:Deimos Mar 04 2004 from Opportunity 4.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 11:03, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please be advised that I have recently conducted a review of the Rorschach test (formerly Rorschach inkblot test) talk page and archives. At some point, you have commented on the issue of the display and/or placement of the Rorschach inkblot image. Based on my understanding of your comment(s), I have placed you into one of three categories. I am issuing this note so that you can review how I have placed you, and to signal if this is an appropriate placement and/or to make known your current thoughts on this matter. You may either participate in discussion at the article talk page or leave a note at my talk page; but to keep things in one place, you should also clarify at Talk:Rorschach test/2009 consensus review/addendum. Longer statements may be made here or quick clarifications/affirmations based on several pre-written statements can be made here. Best regards, –xeno^talk 15:02, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Further to the above, we would appreciate if you could briefly take the time to place yourself below one of the suggested statements here. If none of these statements represents your current position, please compose your own or simply sign "Not applicable" under "Other quick clarifications". Likewise sign as N/A if you do not want to participate further in this debate. If you choose not to respond then you will likely not be counted with respect to further consensus-determining efforts. –xeno^talk 14:50, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Blank Map Falklands san carlos.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Sreejith K (talk) 07:44, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ellipse.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. MGA73 (talk) 19:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Aarau location.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Cloudbound (talk) 19:09, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Koblenz (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not enough entries to justify a disambiguation page.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. PatGallacher (talk) 15:16, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Swiss town 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 21:23, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox creator has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. eh bien mon prince (talk) 09:05, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Miniscule of Sound 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/Miniscule of Sound 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 notice from the top of the article. The Banner talk 22:52, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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) 22:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

   At User talk:Fuzzypeg#Pentagram of Venus i communicated to the contributor of the most recent version of Pentagram#Pentagram of Venus about my concern that that section needs to become an independent page (and be linked from the Pentagram article). You also may want to consider commenting at Talk:Pentagram#Omnibunstrosity.
--Jerzy•t 06:17, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Orders of magnitude (density) 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/Orders of magnitude (density) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 notice from the top of the article. ∯WBG^converse 06:29, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]