User talk:Soumyasch/archive 2

Hello

If my username is WikipediaAddict, do you really think I'm a new user? That wasn't necessary, but thanks anyway. Wikipediaaddict 05:59, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archived

Archived the talk page. If you posted here previously, and want to continue the discussion, please bring the matter back from the archive page. --Soumyasch 04:29, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

S.O.A.P.

The image looks fine to me? Your formatting isn't showing much change between diffs from what I can tell. Doesn't look like you need to change it. What are you trying to do, maybe I can help?⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 08:41, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Sourav Ganguly

Hi Soumyasch,

I'm really glad that you are trying to expand the article, especially as there are so many people out there who don't know head nor tail about NPOV. I'm sorry that I will not be able to contribute much (as I am busy with completeing the ODI Bios) but I will most definitely look over your work & make any necessary modifications. Once again I would like to thank you for taking up this responsibility.

Cheers

Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 09:16, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Team Russ

Hello, could you please reconsider your vote for the Team Russ article to be deleted. The Team is quickly developing and has a fixture with a university team. I would also like to know your definition of a 'notable dodgeball team'. Thank you for your time. Wright123 20:13, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your quick reply (I’m sorry mine is less quick). I understand the problem about verifiability. However, there are many articles with out any references, including: Italo Balbo, David M. Schneider, Baltimore classification and Tamworth F.C. (these seem random because they are; I used 'Random Article' to find them). I'm afraid that team Russ does not have any Internet publications, however, it has been mentioned in a local paper.

The fact that it does not belong to a well-known league is a problem. However, there isn’t (as yet) a league is Bristol (where the team is based). However, the team has a fixture with a university team (the University of the West of England) and plans to play at other universities as well as going to the next major UK tournament.

Again, thank you very much for your reply.

Wright123 19:27, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thank you for your message. I have put a reference to the local paper it appeared in (a good idea, thanks). Thank you for being so reasonable.

Wright123 16:48, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help, advise and support. Wright123 09:28, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hero

Hi, I just thought I'd bring to your attention the changes at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hero (Chad Kroeger song) to see if you want to rethink your vote. Dismas|(talk) 10:51, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alizee peer review

Hi Soumyasch, at the moment I don't think there is very much that can be improved on the article. It is not ready to be a featured article because the sources we're using in the article such as the Amazon pages are not really Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Also, I think the use of fair use images as is being done in the gallery is dubious. But in any case the article has improved greatly! Good job! Cheers, jacoplane 14:19, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although, even though nominating the article on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates would probably fail, it might bring more attention to the article, which would lead to it being improved. And then maybe in the future a seconf FAC could be succesful. It would be great to have this article featured on the Main Page. jacoplane 15:36, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just So You Know

You don't have to vote delete on your nomination, it's assumed since you're the nominator. Just make sure the editor of the article has been notified, and it's off to the races! T K E 07:08, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's a template, but I don't use it because it's impersonal. Link to the article, explain why and be civil about it. There is a good reason: in AfDs, after awhile, you will be called to Request for Comment or ultimately arbitration. If you're assuming good faith, you have cover yourself. T K E 07:22, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

You've totally earned this one. Cheers!

The Original Barnstar
For your ongoing very high-quality work on many Windows-related
articles! This is some great work you're doing.
– Warrens

Alizee

Hey, the article looks goods good. I'll take a look at it again later, in the end beauty is in the eye of the beholder :) jacoplane 01:49, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock me

{{unblock|I use a shared IP. The vandalizing edit was not mine.}} Hey I use a shared IP. Someone named User Talk:Anshumsaxena did a vandalizing edit and my IP (220.225.53.35) is blocked. So even I cannot edit any article. Please help me out. PLEASE. --soUmyaSch 19:56, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have undone the autoblock, should be ok now. --pgk(talk) 20:56, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yumiko

Hi, thanks for your comment. Actually, her name is Yumiko, but she is also known as Usako in Latin America. I would like to change the main title to "Yumiko" but I don't know how, can you help? Her last name is the same. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaimemrm2002 (talk • contribs)

IP adress

I've tagged the IP with {{sharedip}}. You could have done this yourself, there is no law that says only admins can do so. If you have any more problems let me know. Cya! jacoplane 10:18, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Soumyasch. Good work on identifying Aux88 as a copyright violation. Next time you should blank the article, except for the copyvio template, and list the article on copyright problems. There are instructions on how to list the article on the template. Thanks, Kjkolb 07:08, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did? It must have been eons back, 'coz I don't remember anything about the article now. Anyways, sorry if I didn't blank the article. It was unintentional. --soUmyaSch 09:45, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit to user page

Hi, thanks for changing back what you thought was a wrongful edit to my user page, however I had merely forgetton to login. Honestly though, it's amazing to think that people are this fast in spotting these things though, keep up the good work. Skier51907 16:01, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Deletion Change

I just wanted to let you know that I removed your deletion tag on a Grand Theft Auto article and placed a speedy deletion instead. Socom49 16:50, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

Hi! This is the first time we are interacting. Nice to see someone from Balurghat. Another wikipedia Aryasanyal is probably from there. By the way, the "History" in Kolkata had been much a source of concern. It was tremendously difficult to decide what to leave, and what to include! In fact, just before nominating Kolkata for FAC, today I included 3 new lines. One on "Black Hole" (it was previously there, later deleted, again re-inserted!!), because, according to FA critertia, the article should not leave any majot points. "Black Hole" was a mojor thing, I thought. In any case, it may have to be deleted, if cionsensus builds up. Again, CPIM rule of 30 years needs a mention. And most interstingly, we were at a loss where to include info on Mother Teresa. We had to choose History, as demographics was considerd not to be a better place!

Ragarding lead, it should summarise the whole article and may/may not contain info on the basis of the name , according to the guidelines laid out in Wikiprohect Indian Cities. That's why it seems a bit long. If consensus builds up, we may renove the origin of name to a new separate section altogether. Let's see! Thanks a lot.--Dwaipayanc 19:11, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Ok that you put the matter in FAC. However, I myself am not going to shift the naming discussion to a separate section right now. I will wait for what users like Rama's Arrow, Blacksun and Nichalp have to say. Basically, as an independent section, "name" is not large enough. Yes it can be enlarged, but that would be enlarging for the sake of enlargement. The origin of name has been elaborately discussed in History of Kolkata. We do not want to make "History" section more big by incorporating more info. Already the "History" is quite big to keep user hooked on to read! Let's see.--Dwaipayanc 05:45, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In case of Indian cities which are FA, the naming is eother incoporated in the lead (as in Chennai), or converted to a separate section (as in Bangalore). Please check out.--Dwaipayanc 05:51, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. no no. Please dont misunderstand me! I am not getting you weong. It was just a sort of propaganda! When more discussions follow, you will be already informed regarding the other articles - that's why. in fact, I myself had created seperate naming section, while after review it was decided to insorporate in the lead! Bye.--Dwaipayanc 06:17, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, just came to know that you are currently in Gandhinagar. I am in Gandhinagar as well, and I study in Gujarat National Law University. I suppose with all the programmer's userboxes you have got, you probably study in DA-IICT. --Andy123(talk) 08:44, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, 'Twas me on orkut! :D Hope you dont mind. \o/ --Andy123(talk) 10:39, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Circumcision Userbox

You may find a userfied version of the deleted box in my user space at User:Tomyumgoong/ubx/nocirc, feel free to subst or transclude it if you wish. Tomyumgoong 20:25, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help

HELP - do you know how to put a redirect in? LukeL 10:33, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!!

Hi Soum,

I got your message today only. Not been logging into Wiki for sometime now. Sorry, but I am not from Balurghat but from Jalpaiguri. Anyways same geographical zone of North Bengal :).

I guess it might have been Dwaipayan who told you. I guess he's the only one Wikipedian that I am in touch with personally. He's been doing a great work on the Kolkata article.

If you want, you can get in touch me also at arya.sanyal@gmail.com

Thanks, Arya

SQL server

Your edit and edit comments don't line up here [1]. Which is it supposed to be, "free" or "open source"? -Ravedave 14:23, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quantum GIS

Hi, You have a point. It'd probably be more accurate to say I don't consider it blatant advertising unlike some of the junk I've come across recently. A fairly small amount of editing would help the article a lot in this respect so I feel other grounds for deletion would be necessary. Dlyons493 Talk 15:32, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sruthi21

Hello soumya, and thanks for ur help Sruthi 05:56, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Martha Corey

Hey, I added a few comments on this article's AfD. Suggest a withdrawal of nom. Thanks -- Samir (the scope) धर्म 16:04, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

yeah I just saw your comments. I missed those, and am withdrawing nom. But seriously it needs a major overhaul. --soUmyaSch 16:06, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed! Looks like a grade school assignment now! I understand why you thought it needed deletion initially. I'll work on it a bit. Cheers -- Samir (the scope) धर्म 16:08, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: RFD

I've speedily redirected it to Brzóza Królewska, and closed the nomination. Most likely the guy copied the wrong title when attempting to create the redirect. — May. 1, '06 [11:02] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Gravity vomit

Hi, just a note to let you know that it's not permitted to re-add {{subst:prod}} to a page after it's been removed, even if the removing user didn't give a reason. You must then take it to AFD. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 18:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but PRODding rules must be modded to state that if a PROD is removed because the user doesn't agree, he/she must give a reason for it. --soUmyaSch 08:00, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That needs to be suggested at Wikipedia talk:Proposed deletion. There is an ongoing discussion there. Stifle (talk) 10:08, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Darjeeling

Hi! Could you please have a look at the article Darjeeling and comment? Is something grossly missing in the article? And also some minor things you would like to see? Bye. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 12:02, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Re:Darjeeling - flood of requests

Thanks for your comments. I will answer the comments in the talk page. The best news is you are going to darjeeling shortly. That will be of great help. Since you have told me to tell you if you could help, I am gonna bombard you :). Here goes the things you can do:

  • If you have a digital camera, take some shots of the colonial buildings, especially the schools. Also you can take some culturally oriented photos, like, some festivals(if your stay coincide with some, that is). A pic of Raj Bhawan. A pic of the Mountaineering institute. A good pic of the Mall. A pic of a congested road may also prove to be good. If you happen to visit Senchal lake, get one pic of it also. get a few pics of the monastries.
  • Take some notes on the monstries - those are not discussed in the article.
  • Some pics of the usual tourist spots - though they wont be of much use in the main article.
  • pic of a land rover.
  • some info on the Darjeeling Carnival.
  • some historical anecdotes and pics eg some old cemetary. Old church with inscriptions. Some info on the lalkuthi and also a pic.
  • Info on why the Raj Bhawan was there? A summer capital?
  • clarification on the exact role of DGHC in Darjeeling town, not the district.
  • any info on crime.
  • info on local newspapers, names, establishment, circulation area etc.
  • info on old establishments eg Planter's club.
  • restaurants: Gleanaries, Caventers - pics and info (year of establishment, owners etc.)
  • Any inscriptions u see (botanical garden, zoo, mountaineering institute), try ti take note, or, a pic.

this is not the end.LoL. Sorry for the overburdening. Try to get similar info on Balurghat also, and enlarge it! Bye.--Dwaipayan (talk) 13:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, this is the problem of anouncing "I am ready to help others!" Anyway, please do not forget to get some good photos of those school buildings, or, an one-off forlorn Mock Tudor building. Crime stat is problem I know. Old establishments (British), if you happen to visit those, usually have some notes/description. That should be enough.
An interesting thing is "Darjeeling disaster". I doubt if anybody knows about it. A massive landslide in 1898. However, the year is different in Britannica 1911. Maybe some old church worker know about it! Its fascinating. Just keep your ears open. LoL.
You know, thanks to the Wikipedia, my outlook has changed on travelling. Previously, just tour and drink was the norm. Nowadays, I try to dig up something interesting! Unfortunately, I did not have any long tour after I became a wikipedoholic. Bye. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:48, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Alizee203.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Alizee203.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Possibly unfree Image:Alizee award.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Alizee award.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Possibly unfree Image:Alizee000.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Alizee000.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

For all 3 images

Yeah I uploaded those (but it was loooong back - on my first day in Wikipedia). But they were orphanned once I learned of their copyright status. I believe orphanned images get deleted after a week!!! Anyways, please delete those. Its so long now that I had even forgotten I had uploaded those. --soUmyaSch 11:27, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TOC

The TOC, I feel, is a major problem in terms of usability. Sure it does give an overview of the articles' contents, but its implementation is a major cause of many problems.

  • Firstly, it eats into the article's space. It creates a gap between the lead of the article and the rest of the article.
  • The floating TOCs are also not good enough a solution - they squeeze the text horizontally.
  • The TOCs usability as a shortcut to the sections get pretty limited. In a long article, the TOC should serve as a shortcut to sections so that we do not spend time searching for it. But once we a quite far way from the TOC, it is not visible. So we must find the relevant section manually or scroll up to the TOC.

The soultion would be to move the TOC to the left pane (where toolbox, searchbox and navbox currently exist) and doing it in an iFrame, so that it doesn't scroll if the article is scrolled (like MSDN documentations). In that way, the toc would be accessible irrespective of the location in the article. Another thing may be done is to allow reodering of sections by drag-and-drop on the toc. Also in edit view, the toc can be used to navigate to sections.

But this gives rise to the problem with placement of toolbox and navbar. (The search box may be moved to the top above the tabs). Do you have any idea how this can be achieved? --soUmyaSch 11:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See this to get an idea of how to place stuff by specifying absolute co-ordinates even outside the article space. You should also know about the macros __NOTOC__, __TOC__, __TOCRight__ etc., -- Sundar \talk \contribs 11:55, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, you seem that you have misunderstood my problem. I am not talking of moving the toc around the article. What I want is to make the toc Replace the left-hand side toolbox, searchbox, and navbox, and render it such that it fixed and do not scroll out of the screen if the article is scrolled. My intention is to find a layout which keeps the toc onscreen always regarless of which position in the article one is in - be at the start, the middle, or the end, without affecting the layout of the articles. The macros do not give this effect, nor are they scalable with long tocs, and higher resolutions. Please chip in if you have any suggestion regarding how to achieve what I want. --soUmyaSch 12:15, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Did you see this link given by me? Does it not place something outside the article space? That template places an image above the article space. In our case, we need to place the content referred by __TOC__ outside the article. I know it's not straight-forward. But, I thought it's something you could look at. Surely, the macros were not designed to solve your problem. Good luck. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 12:25, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not just placing the toc outside, it must be placed in a different iFrame, not just a div. And if I do so, the left-mounted boxes will get hidden, so they have to be moved to somewhere else - I can't see any space to move them to. It was this suggestion I was asking for - where can I move these toolbox, searchbox and navbox. Anywayz, thanks for your help. --soUmyaSch 12:31, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
AFIK, we don't use iFrames in Mediawiki. The left frame is implemented as a list inside a div element. I don't have any suggestions if your problem is that of space. Best to ask in the Village Pump. You could also discuss this at MediaWiki talk:Common.css. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 12:48, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It needs to be found out how to get an equivalent functionality of iframes using div - may be absolute position divs. But the toc inside that has to be independently scrollable. The simplest way to do this would be an iFrame, though. --soUmyaSch 13:15, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LiveConnect v6

Hi Soumyasch

There is with respect to the edit you made on the Windows Live Messenger page. I had included a link to LiveConnect v6 which is a addon to Windows Live Messenger. It might not be right on my part to argue that the link was useful to the visitors to that page because I made the software myself.

But I am doing so anyway because LiveConnect v5 was removed from the page on the argument that the software used a downgrader to allow people to log in to Windows Live Messenger without an invite and nothing else was at fault [user:Kyle]. The downgrader component has since been removed and the link reinserted. That was link which you just removed...

I don't see anything wrong with the link to the software being put there since: 1. It is spyware and malware free. 2. It is genuinely useful to the users of Windows Live Messenger. 3. I don't, in any way, benefit from the software being used; it is absolutely free and there is no adware bundled with it.

I created the software for people to use for free, without royalty; just like Wikipedia is being used today.

If you can point out a rule that I've broken from the Wikipedia guidelines, I will be happy to remove the link which I have since reinserted.

Thank you for your time

Koshy John (User page|Talk page)

Re:Gauhar Jan

Hi! The article reads almost like a copyvio, I mean taken from somewhere. i am sorry I am extremely busy for a few days, and cannot devote time. It's ok with NPOV. Its not suitable for AfD I think. If you get to know it is from which site, you can tag it as copyvio. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:53, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Puł"

If I created this page, it was by accident. It needs to go. If you removed the "speedy-delete" tag, please reinstate it. I am a serious editor, which for now I presume you are too. KonradWallenrod 10:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I misunderstood your intent. How do I get the damned thing deleted? KonradWallenrod 11:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I see now how I screwed up, attempting to set up a link from a Wikisource article. Henceforth I'll privately call every such mess-up a "Pul." KonradWallenrod 11:24, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well said. Thanks again. And best of luck on your exams! KonradWallenrod 12:54, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strike through

Thanks! -- Kicking222 15:04, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extinctioners Page

Hey Soumyasch, thanks for checking out the Extinctioners page I created, but I'm curious as to why you reduced the group photo at the top of the page, i mean I know you though it was too big but by reducing by more than half you made view the picture more difficult by it being smaller and you left a very large blank space next to the Contents bar, once again, I hope you liked the page but please, this is my first page, I have put alot of effort into creating the page, uploading photo after photo, becoming acustom to using the site, so please don't reduce that pic or any others for me, please, thanks and I know Wikipedia.org allows editing of articles and everything, its just this is my first page and I just like it the way it is but thanks for you for you input, and I hope you are not offended by what I have said, I don't like to anger people in any way, thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by RVDDP2501 (talk • contribs)

Vista/Aero similarity to Mac Aqua

The quote is properly used. I am not taking a position about whether the similarity is intended or coincidental (though the statement is sarcasm, intended to convey the opposite of its apparent meaning), only that PC World (and many, many other reviewers) find the Aero interface strikingly similar to Aqua. The quote is used correctly. -- Gnetwerker 17:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extinctioners page again

Hey Soumyasch, RVDDP2501 here again, thanks for the reply, I really appreciate it alot, listen, you seem to know a ton more about Wikipedia.org than ever can, could you take a look at the pics that I have added to my page to see if wikipedia.org might remove, I have given each a name, the name if the site where I aquires the pic from and have stated each as (promotional), also I had aquired some, most, if not all info about Extinctioners from Wikifur? I just got a notice at the bottom of my page about that and I don't know what that means, have I done something wrong or bad?

P.S. I have added more pics, what do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RVDDP2501 (talk • contribs)

License tagging for Image:WPGallery.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:WPGallery.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:06, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I somehow forgot to add. Have added it now. --soUmyaSch 12:13, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extinctioners page again

Hey Soumyasch, I added the ((fair use in|<article name>)) to one of the pic but it said image:

This work is copyrighted and unlicensed. It does not fall into one of the blanket fair use categories listed at Wikipedia:Fair use#Images or Wikipedia:Fair use#Audio_clips. However, it is believed that the use of this work in the article "Extinctioners"

to illustrate the object in question where no free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Any other uses of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement. See Wikipedia:Fair use and Wikipedia:Copyrights.

To the uploader: please add a detailed fair use rationale for each use, as described on Wikipedia:Image description page, as well as the source of the work and copyright information

so what must I do now cause i'm still a little bit confused, how do i write a rationale and I thought I had given the sourse the site at least, do them mean the artist, then how do I gove the source (artist) and any suggestions on how I can make my page look better? please tell me soon, I'm afraid the pic might be removed if I don't doe something soon, take a loke at the group photo at the top of the page, click on edit to see what I have put inside and tell me what I need to do, I really appriecitae everything, thank you

I have sadly had to remove a lot of picks due to word from an administrator, how does it look now in your opinion? it still hurts to have removed so much hard work, sigh

NEW EXTINCTIONERS PAGE

Hey man, RVDDP here, what do you think of the new version of the page?