User talk:Joopercoopers/Archive 2copy editor's leaguehi; i just wanted to thank-you for the friendly advice, which i've followed. sry 2 see you are retired, hope it's not permantent.Lx 121 (talk) 19:30, 31 January 2008 (UTC) RfRI've left a question on RfR for you. Thanks. Acalamari 23:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC) CathedralReplied here. Samsara (talk • contribs) 01:10, 11 February 2008 (UTC) Re:Chester CathedralMuch better. If you could give it one more town-down to eliminate the glare, it should be good. Juliancolton Talk 01:47, 11 February 2008 (UTC) Hey jooperWhat's happening? You wrote.. "The best way to go along with this is to discuss it in the talk page for circumcision. I checked your addition, and I think that you were reverted because you added it to the lead introduction. I think such a fact would go much better into a specific section like "HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases" or "Risks of circumcision." Why do these guys get to put "Circumcision can reduce HIV" in the lead introduction??????? Really?? That is unfair! Why aren't you telling them to take all that stuff thats not directly about circumcision OFF the lead introduction? How come they get to put all that crap in the lead introduction about HIV but i can't put the ONE sentence down about herpes and chlamydia? Lead introduction? Read the article's circumcision lead introduction and tell me it's not filled with stuff just as important as what I am putting in. Thank you. 70.114.38.167 (talk) 07:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC) heyoops wrong person, sorry. Two people sent me what looked like identical messages. Sorry. Anyway.. you wrote "I'm afraid I think Bishonen may no longer be with us." I'm sorry cooper I don't know who Bishonen is. Who is that? 70.114.38.167 (talk) 07:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC) Why don't you nominate the article for the GA process? --Redtigerxyz (talk) 11:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
The Never Ending Siege of The Taj MahalHoly toledo...Amazed you can keep this up. --Nemonoman (talk) 02:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Favour - a big oneI wannt to start a collaberation to write the best featured article ever, a real bonkbuster of a page, here's the subject Pena National Palace, yep OK it's not classical architecture, and architecturally it may be a littlechallenging - where do you come in? Well! you remember that very clever map you made for prince's Palace of Monaco..... except I want it to be a clicky map too, we can do it step by step and I'll advise, but sort of linking to all the photographs that Husond has taken, there are quite few, quite a lot in fact. what do you think. I can do the straight forward maps, the one at Queluz is mine, not the clicky part, but the layout, but Pena has lots of odd angles and round towers, and I'm not very good at those, in fact I can only do rectangles - what do you say? Giano (talk) 13:24, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Crown Fountain FACBased on your comments at Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture/Peer review/Crown Fountain you may want to comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Crown Fountain
Your unwanted attentionsMy vestibule, though capacious, is not for any old Tom, Dick or Harry to enter, Mr Joopercoopers. And that nasty crusty growth in your entrance way (nothing so grand as a vestibule for you, no doubt) needs attention. I suggest you consult a physician, perhaps one specialising in certain disorders, post haste. Princess Venetia di Cannoli (talk) 11:55, 21 March 2008 (UTC) Chester CathedralThanks for your excellent photos of Chester Cathedral. I should like to use them all, but there's not enough room. I've swapped the ceiling with the choirstalls, because I think the latter is a "must". Probably going to go for GA with the article (whether you are a "believer" or not!) - it's a bit of much needed kudos for the Cheshire Project. Are you going to add the images to WP:Commons? If you did they would then be available with the {{commonscat}} link. Keep up the excellent work. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:35, 24 March 2008 (UTC) New Chester Cathedral imageHi. The new image you've taken is definitely an improvement over the original in terms of tonality and exposure, but I still think the colour temperature is a bit peculiar... I think you might have overcorrected it though, as the lower portion is a bit yellow-green, instead of the yellow-orange that you would expect. I'm happy to have a look at the original files again (if you can be bothered emailing them, it must have been a bit laborious to attach them) if you'd like, or you could just adjust the colour balance yourself. I think fine tuning the colour/exposure is probably all that is necessary for FPC, although you can never quite be sure how hostile and critical the response is going to be. Tone mapped images have great potential but they're obviously much more difficult to keep natural looking. :-) Oh, and I think theres a dust blob just above the middle tower on one of the clouds. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 08:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC) Re: New Chester Cathedral imageSorry for the belated reply, I was in cancun mexico for spring break (be looking for some Chichen Itza theme pictures in the next week or two) Anyway... the new image is far and away the best and, even in its current (slightly blue form) would earn my support. The composition is 100% better as is the sharpness, and tone mapping. I share Diliff's concerns about the color temperature even though I think it adds to the mood of the picture is some ways ;-). It would be better corrected though. If you end up sending the files to Diliff, I'd be happy to have a look as well, but I think you'd do just as good a job yourself. Get that color a bit better and I so no reason why it would fail FPC. Cheers -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 03:00, 31 March 2008 (UTC) Fix double entryHello! You deleleted the following from Parnell on the grounds that it was a "double entry": At the age of thirty-two and after just over four years in parliament he had put into place a political coalition without precedent in Irish politics [1] I do not find how it can be termed a "double" entry? It was a single relevant point made by Paul Bew and I feel it still needs to be retained, in other words I wish to re-instate it unless convinced to the contrary? Greetings Osioni (talk) 18:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC) Why on Earth did you create that? J Milburn (talk) 21:48, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Stretton water millHave nominated this image at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates - Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Stretton water mill. Good luck. --jjron (talk) 14:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Chester Cathedral againAh mate.. I think you've overcompensated in the other direction again, it looks far too red-orange now. I've taken the previous one and changed the colour balance a bit and it looks roughly the way I was looking for, with neutral foreground colour and blue sky, which I imagine was the way it originally looked. Rather than upload yet another edit, I'll just give you the values I used. I used +4 towards the Red, -8 towards Magenta, and +15 towards Blue, leaving tone balance on the midtones (this is in Photoshop Colour Balance). I'm happy to email you the version I've edited. Its probably not perfect though, and I'd like to have a go with the originals if you'll give me access to them. I'll send you an email. Can't promise I can improve on the edit I just described, but its worth a shot. The image has potential, it just needs some polish. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 17:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Long grassI hadn't thought of the "long grass" thing. But I would like to note that "your offer to provide stats on blocking and who did it to established users" is a misunderstanding. If I had the technical skill and know-how to do this, I'd go ahead and do it myself, but I am actually looking for someone (pr some others) to help me do this. That's probably why I missed the "I'll get back to you on this" bit. Though I'm as bad as anyone at not actually following up on things, so I so sympathise. Sometimes I think everyone should try and do less, but better. The question is, which bits need more attention? Prioritisation has never been easy. Carcharoth (talk) 12:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC) Laws on CivilityHere is something that I posted on the earlier IRC decision page about a court case which ruled that the term "civility" was too broad to be enforceable.[1] http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20080121-9999-1m21civil.html]
This case doesn't apply here because Wikipedia is not required to respect freedom of speech or freedom of expression, but it is an interesting ruling on the perils of trying to enforce civility. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uncle uncle uncle (talk • contribs) |