User talk:Trysha/archive5

re: testing

You l left me this message on my talk page:


Thank you for experimenting with the page Pomeranian (dog) on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. - Trysha (talk) 17:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

That wasn't a test, I fixed it so you could see the picture! Pokemega32 18:00, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello as well...

Thanks for the welcome. I think I fly blind most of the time, but struggle on. I tend to wander from dogs to snakes to spiders to other obscure Australian native flora and fauna. But try to keep an eye on the dogs when I have time. --Bcsr4ever 08:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit needed

Sorry I have accidentally over-written Recent Edits at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Kennel_Club :( Not sure how to restore it so please forgive me Sanft 14:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :-) Sanft 15:09, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

German shepherd

Thanks for the edit. I wasn't sure what to do with it so I edited an put an NPOV tag, thought the edit would suffice and intended to revisit to remove the NPOV and further edit with sources. Your reasoning was correct. You must be an intelligent breed :-) Anyway, while they are an intelligent breed of dog, it is difficult to test. Intelligence is bred in and noticed by what the dog does without human commands. Just the point of using only AKC breeds as a testing base was ridiculous. Noles1984 14:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No...

I did not leave a commercial link or a link to a website that I own. Please get your facts straight before throwing accusations.

kingrottweiler.com is not an web forum or breeder page. It has a lot of articles about rottweler training and health. Warnings for everyone. You can review it because it is best guide for rottweiler owner's or who wants to buy a rottweiler. It is an informational and reputable rottweiler web site and i m not a breeder. Only a rottie fan... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Samiguzel (talk • contribs).

Hi there, ref the links to the rescue sites, fair enough. but this site: http://www.airedaleterriers.org/ may deserve to be mentioned. It provide in depth information on all aspects of the breed including in depth articles on the nature of Airedales, deciding if an Airedale is appropriate for a family etc. These are major questions for a lot of visitors to the wiki. Have a look and give me YHO? I will leave it in your hands..

o)

ps. i have no connection to the site other than using it to judge my suitability to owning an airedale - I now have two....

Yours adam ps.. looking at the Wikipedia:External_links#Links_normally_to_be_avoided i would question you removing some of the links that you have. There are no official policy under "what wikipedia is not" about links either. No where under that section does it state "wiki is not a web directory". Adamjennison111 20:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dog food

Tidier again (tho personally internal links don't bother me - it's the external ones that get me going). Take care --Nigel (Talk) 07:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK maybe not your favourite I know but guess what I found in Cat food - thanks for giving me the idea and see you around, regards --Nigel (Talk) 12:07, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Corgi Myth

You got the phrasing of that trivia fact about the saddle marking better than I did. I love that myth about corgis being "fairy-horses," but I've only ever heard one version of it. I really wanted to add that. Thanks for helping to get the phrasing right.

Hang in there!

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
In honor of your tireless, endless, on-going, eternal vigilance against vandalism and various infractions of What Wikipedia is not among all those thousands of dog-related articles, you are more than deserving of this lovely barnstar. Thanks for hanging in there. Elf | Talk 21:44, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Believe me, I know about the being flamed & yelled at. I'm not on WP much any more, just don't have the time for it, but every time I log in and check a couple of things, your name is almost inevitably there within the last couple of weeks, clearing things up. There's SO much to do. I'm very glad to see that you're still at it. Elf | Talk 22:50, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article breaking apart

Hi Trysha,

I noticed on the Association of Mergist Wikipedians page that you're a mergist, too. I have been writing an article about the letter t, but editors have begun to break it up into nonsensical entries, like Abbreviations and symbols of T. So, I was wondering if you could do me a huge favor and possibly give your opinion here? If you could, I would be greatly in your debt.

Best wishes,

Macaw 54 09:46, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Inara BBS

Why was this section of the ISCABBS wiki page removed?

It was not an "ad" for another BBS, its very much a part of the recent history and political happenings of ISCABBS, of which I have been a member for 15 years. I am hesitant to replace the text, but any user of ISCABBS will agree what the creation of the new BBS to which the small snippet of text refers to is an important milestone in ISCABBS in and of itself. I can understand the confusion, if one were not a member of ISCABBS.

Good faith and your RFA

In your RFA answer, you wrote that you "try [your] best to assume good faith on the part of other editors, even when it seems glaringly obvious that they are not acting in good faith." I just wanted to point out that if it is glaringly obvious a user isn't acting in good faith (blatant vandalism, sockpuppetry, etc.), we can drop the assume and recognize their bad faith edits. I understand what you mean, though--it's best to err on the side of good faith. Good luck with your RFA! Mine closes tomorrow and it has been one of the most stressful things I've had to deal with on Wikipedia. Here's hoping yours goes much more smoothly. -- Merope Talk 03:46, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, replying on your page :) Trysha (talk) 18:46, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hmm

why did you remove the links to the lawdogs site for pit bulls? i'm not working for them, as you seem to imagine. it's just a good site for some positive pit bull press, showing the actual usefulness of the breed.

you seem to think i'm somehow trying to make money or advertise my site, which is ridiculous. i dont own or run any animal sites.

try smiling once in a while, you'll enjoy it.

Cookie!
I noticed that you withdrew your RfA. Although I did not participate (sorry!), I must compliment you for your withdrawal message that demonstrates good character and willingness to improve. Don't be discouraged by this RfA. Keep up the great work and I'm sure that the next one will be successful. Meanwhile, have a snack. :-) Regards.--Húsönd 03:55, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA withdrawl

I second the sentiments above. I think you will make a great admin, hopefully after Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Trysha 3. <rant>I believe that many people have standards that are far too lofty for adminship. Adminship is no big deal is the famous quote (Jimbo's I think). Also, considering admins comprise only 0.04% of users (Special:Statistics), I think it's a bit silly to turn away promising candidates such as yourself.</rant> I hope you'll continue plugging away, especially on the spam front (good work with the templates by the way!) and I look forward to RfA #3! --AbsolutDan (talk) 14:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see I'm not the first to come along to encourage you to try, try again. I was sorry to see the results of your most recent RfA. It's wikipedia's loss to put off your adminship until later . Agent 86 20:16, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Morgan Wright

G'day Trysha. Alas, we have a problem with one Morgan Wright, who is putting quite a lot of unsourced stuff into Dog, but failing to cite or source anything. He doesn't actually refuse, he just doesn't do it. The trouble is, some of the material he puts in actually looks quite good -- if it was to be referenced. When I rv'd his edits after a week of wating for a response, he rv'd my edit with the comment "kicked Gordon E to the curb, nothing here needs citation, it's common knowledge except to Gordon E. I'm a veterinarian and my books are in storage (IN MY BRAIN)".

I promptly rv'd that edit, which he rv'd with the comment "... Remove Vandalism". Unfortunately, Morgan doesn't read his talk page, so no dialog is possible.

Yes, I am requesting your help. Please. Gordon | Talk, 12 October 2006 @12:55 UTC

RfA thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA discussion! I appreciate you contributing your voice to the debate and its outcome. "I thought they were an admin already" is one of the most flattering comments I got. I hope how I wield the mop makes you proud. Thanks!


Basenji entry

Hello,

It appears you might have removed the link to our rescue on the Basenji article. The link is to BRAT: www.basenjirescue.org

I added the link back and would appreciate if it can be left there. If there is a technical problem with the link, please let me know. Thank you.

Mike Swan Chairman, BRAT, Inc. mikeswan@basenjirescue.org

I cannot reply on your talk page, as you are an anonymous user. By the wikipedia guidelines and policies, links to rescues aren't allowed for many reasons. By the external links guidelines, you can't link to your own site. But, even if you suggest it on the talk page, Wikipedia is not a directory, it's a soapbox to promote rescue advocacy. It's not a place to promote your organization, no matter that organization it is non-commercial or noble. Don't get me wrong, I am involved in rescue myself. It is the only place to get a dog in my opinion, but I can't put a link to my rescue either, as much as I would like to. Honestly, we are neutral here. if we allow links to rescues we have to allow links to every back yard breeder out there. - Trysha (talk) 01:55, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Back yard breeders are commercial, rescues are not. That's quite a difference. --Gloriamarie 01:28, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wolf lineage comments in German Shepard and others

User 212.36.181.65 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) keeps inserting comments about "wolf blood" into this article and other dog articles (see the contribs for author). Is there anything to that claim? I can't find any reliable sources to support the contention.

Also, could you give me some feedback on this AfD? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tamaskan Dog It seems to me that it usually takes a decade or more to establish a breed to the point where even the developer(s) consider it notable enough to start announcing it to the breeding community, but this breed seems to have just popped up out of thin air (the owner of the registry and the main breeder are the same folks). It was the subject of some rather rancorous exchanges on a British breeder BBS as well (the admins had to pull the thread). I really don't know much about dogs but I don't like hoaxes ;-)

Tubezone 14:37, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Belizeans

Many thanks for the help on the Belize spam. I had rather a trying day yesterday, and it was nice to get up this morning and find at least one of my problems solved. Cheers! -- Mwanner | Talk 13:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bungee jumping spam

Hi. If you're around, there's persisten spamming going on at Bungee jumping, and I'm fresh out of reverts (actually one over the limit). If you've got a minute... TIA, -- Mwanner | Talk 19:27, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're the best! Thanks. And yes, I've sort of played by the "it's vandalism, so it doesn't count" rule, but I recently noticed that WP:3RR says "Still, repeated reversion against vandalism should be avoided", so I try to call in backup if I can. Thanks again. -- Mwanner | Talk 19:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Why do you think that Dog up is an inappropriate external link? The website talk just about dogs, the website have UNIQUE content, the website is unique for dog lovers, all the services are free. Please let me know your criteria. Thanks

Recreation of Article

I read through the undeletion process and it seemed to be just for things deleted by accident. It said I should just re-do the article if the reason the article was deleted was because of a problem that I have now fixed. Thanks Blufawn

I have written on the talk page my explaination, i'm not sure what you mean though. Can you help please? I don't want to be deleted again. Thanks Blufawn


Help. The discussion page is getting out of hand once again and I feel that if an administrator doesn't come on soon and clear this up that the arguement could go on forever. Only problem is that someone seems to of taken down the speedy deletion thing that you put up!! I would much rather have the article deleted than to continue with this arguement, its pointless and quite honestly I believe it may be damaging to the breed, and thats all I care about. What should I do?? Thanks Blufawn

  • FWIW, you can create sub-user pages and ask for feedback there until there is some consensus that the article is ready to be posted in the WP main space. I have several sub-user pages off of my user page if you would like to see examples. Several of my (probably important) questions remain unanswered about the Tamaskan dog; the article may have hopes of surviving this time, but, you don't seem willing to work with me ... so ... you may want to see if you can find someone else before the article gets nominated, again, for an AfD. Keesiewonder talk 12:26, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Westie.JPG at West Highland White Terrier.

Hi. As a significant contributor to the page in question, you are invited to this page to give your opinion on the inclusion or exclusion of Image:Westie.JPG in the article West Highland White Terrier. The specific criteria being examined appear to be:

  • its suitability on quality grounds; and
  • whether it is deemed of sufficient quality, is it more deserving of being shown than other images currently contained within the article, bearing in mind that another issue might be the limitation on including too many images in the article.

Your comments are eagerly awaited. Refsworldlee(chew-fat) 19:57, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help with website sourcing

Headphonos has been removing sourcing notices from the bull dog type breeds. Such as Bully Kutta, Gull Dong and Gull Terr. Headphonos suggests that the website molosserdogs is a reliable one, I was under the impression that it was not a reliable source. Can you give me your opinion on this please? Ensyc18:14, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Trysha,

Thanks again for putting up the photo my wife took of our two Xolos. I was just surfing a few minutes ago and saw that same photo on another site in apparent violation of the license we published it under. You can see for yourself here: http://www.dog-breed-facts.com/Breeds/xolo.html. Personally I'm happy to see the photo being distributed, but it appears that dog-breed-facts.com is trying to claim copyright on it, and also on the other photo that's on the Wikipedia Xolo page. I'm not sure who to talk to about this, or even whether I should be bothered by it.

Thanks for listening, Chris Dellario dellario@comcast.net

Wiki xolo photos appearing elsewhere

Hi Trysha,

Thanks again for putting up the photo my wife took of our two Xolos. I was just surfing a few minutes ago and saw that same photo on another site in apparent violation of the license we published it under. You can see for yourself here: http://www.dog-breed-facts.com/Breeds/xolo.html. Personally I'm happy to see the photo being distributed, but it appears that dog-breed-facts.com is trying to claim copyright on it, and also on the other photo that's on the Wikipedia Xolo page. I'm not sure who to talk to about this, or even whether I should be bothered by it.

Thanks for listening, Chris Dellario dellario@comcast.net

I have not been adding nonsense nor vadalising. I have added to a page with information related directly to a rook piercing of the ear. It included a picture and tips for the piercing. Thanks for removing what took me an hour to do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.110.216.29 (talk) 18:20, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JFK Prep Alumni Group

Hi, My name is Joe Gallagher and I was an instructor there the last full year that JFK was open. Would like to hear from others JFK'ers. 1404 N. Gardner St. #3 Los Angeles, CA 90046 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.214.15.139 (talk) 22:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ISCA.

Hey -- just wanted to zip you a quick note of thanks. At least once every two or three years, I look at the ISCA page; just noticed that you appended some very relevant commentary to my (unsigned) post on the discussion page. It's appreciated.

Thanks,

-Ken (ken@jots.org / kena on ISCA / Ravenpi (talk) 01:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

AfD nomination of Rainbow Bridge (pets)

I have nominated Rainbow Bridge (pets), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rainbow Bridge (pets). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 08:11, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good job

u seem like a great editor. keep up the good work!! :) and feel free to teach me something :) Sorceress150 talk —Preceding undated comment added 19:00, 8 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Writer's Barnstar
Keep up the good work :) Oo Sorceress150 (talk) 19:02, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of The Guide Dog Foundation for the Blind

Hello Trysha,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged The Guide Dog Foundation for the Blind for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Vanamonde93 (talk) 04:13, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio

I've deleted the page for The Guide Dog Foundation because there wasn't a huge thing for notability, but mostly because it was copyvio from this site. Please be aware that we cannot accept articles that have copyvio in them, partially for legal reasons but also because in most cases the text will be written with a promotional bent. It's normal and natural for a website to write about themselves in a positive, promotional manner, but it's not really appropriate for Wikipedia. I'd probably recommend that if you are interested in recreating the article, that you write it in your own words. I'd suggest creating it in your userspace first and looking for sources to help prove notability. The thing to remember is that even if an organization is large or considered to be the biggest and most known of its type, that doesn't guarantee that something passes notability guidelines as a whole. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:48, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, you are correct. :) I overheard someone ask the foundation itself to create their own Wikipedia article. I told this individual NO - the foundation could not create this page as it was COI, but that the individual requesting it can! So I created the article as a stub/example for some them to work on. Being an experienced wikipedia editor with little experience on the subject, I shouldn't have done that. I have instructed those individuals (and thereby the members a guide dog users mailing list/community) to read up on Wikipedia:Credible_claim_of_significance and a the getting started pages and assemble something proper. Still, Thanks for your efforts. - Trysha (talk) 15:59, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]