|
User talk:Wadewitz/Archive 40
|
_-_Kew_Bridge_Steam_Museum.jpg){kind=link}
|
The Editor's Barnstar | |
| For constant above-and-beyond helpfulness, and for being a good role model. Ricardiana (talk) 20:31, 22 July 2009 (UTC) |
Fight Club
Hello, I responded to your concern at the FAC page. :) I will definitely be working on Interpretations of Fight Club to accompany the main article; I want to set a gold standard here! By the way, nice to meet another Hoosier... just finished five years last spring. Missing the cream and crimson already! —Erik (talk • contrib) 01:46, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
- We have a sports team? I must have missed that while onwiki. :) Awadewit (talk) 01:57, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Re: Thank you!
blush Thanks for the kind words! But think nothing of it, it's the least I could do in return for the many contributions you've made to the `pedia in general, and the help you've given me and the Shakespeare wikiproject specifically. Do feel free to drop me a note if you think I can help in any way: if time allows I'll always be happy to help in any way I can. --Xover (talk) 12:45, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks - it is always such a pleasure to work with you! Awadewit (talk) 02:25, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Z Marcas
I'm trying to decide whether or not to make an article about Z Marcas, a Balzac novelette of 10,000 words (27 pages). It's mentioned a fair amount in the HdB literature, but almost always in the same context:
- It discusses his political musings of the moment
- He was walking around one day and saw the name on a shop sign and began raving about how distinctive and evocative the name was
While looking over the discussion on the talk page for Mounseer Nongtongpaw, I was struck by a comment from qp10qp: "This article provides the best one-stop information on Nongtongpaw anywhere. What more can a Wikipedia article do?" I expect the least I can do is the same for Z Marcas. Although it will be very short, maybe it's worth making the article anyway. Thoughts? Scartol • Tok 14:47, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with Qp - if there are sources, make an article! We are creating "the sum of all human knowledge", right? Besides, someday, presumably, there will be more to add to the article, as more people publish on the story. Awadewit (talk) 02:27, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I spent all that time looking up info on it, so I might as well. But as for the whole "There will be more to add later" argument.. If 100 years has only produced enough for a tiny article, I don't know how much hope I have for more in the future. (I suppose it's possible that we'll discover some secret diary where he reveals that Z Marcas is based on his father.) Scartol • Tok 11:31, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- You never know - look at Shelley's works. There was almost nothing published on anything besides Frankenstein until the 1970s. Perhaps this story will come into vogue. :) Awadewit (talk) 13:48, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I spent all that time looking up info on it, so I might as well. But as for the whole "There will be more to add later" argument.. If 100 years has only produced enough for a tiny article, I don't know how much hope I have for more in the future. (I suppose it's possible that we'll discover some secret diary where he reveals that Z Marcas is based on his father.) Scartol • Tok 11:31, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Humor
You're really tuning it up lately! [2] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:46, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- I'm trying to develop a sense of humor. Awadewit (talk) 23:48, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- The breakfast food went over my head! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
- I was playing off Laser's offer of Krispy Kremes. I was also alluding to the fact that in old movies, breakfast was a symbol for sex since they could not show sex on the screen. I was claiming to be out of breakfast food, therefore very busy at night. :) Awadewit (talk) 00:03, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- Well, when I miss it, I miss it good ! (I should watch more old movies :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:04, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- It would be untoward of me to ask just how much Awadewit is getting, such as it is she is unable to keep any breakfast food in the house at all. An enviable amount, I imagine. Brava. --Moni3 (talk) 00:21, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reminder, Moni: that's why I love you! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:25, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- I was playing off Laser's offer of Krispy Kremes. I was also alluding to the fact that in old movies, breakfast was a symbol for sex since they could not show sex on the screen. I was claiming to be out of breakfast food, therefore very busy at night. :) Awadewit (talk) 00:03, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- The breakfast food went over my head! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Sheesh: I am so outdated! http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=breakfast+food SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:09, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Stating the unnecessary
I know you know that articles are never complete. There are places my articles can be improved, and I know where they are. I just need to get around to it. These deficiencies sure beat the hell out of the crap that used to be there, though.
If there are places in your articles that should be improved, they should be stated in the open. What Ottava Rima is doing pisses me off. I cannot expect all editors to have courage, and I cannot admire everyone I come across but this tactic is distinctly cheap and I do not respect it.
It must be the day for stating the unnecessary. --Moni3 (talk) 17:33, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- I think we all know that articles are never perfect. Awadewit (talk) 03:35, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
- (to A) For the record, Ottava did not say anything about you in his emails. Whatever he may say or has said, I still have the utmost respect for you as an editor. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:55, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks - that's nice to hear. :) Awadewit (talk) 03:35, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
: 27 July 2009
- From the editor: Welcome to the build-your-own edition of the Signpost
- Board elections: Board of Trustees elections draw 18 candidates for 3 seats
- Wiki-Conference: Wikimedians and others gather for Wiki-Conference New York
- Wikipedia Academy: Volunteers lead Wikipedia Academy at National Institutes of Health
- News and notes: Things that happened in the Wikimedia world
- Wikipedia in the news: Assorted news coverage of Wikipedia
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Oregon
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 07:40, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
HD FAC
Many thanks for your great review. I believe all your comments have now been addressed. Bests.--Garrondo (talk) 13:40, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- I've responded - my last concern is the lead. I've proposed a new version at Talk:Huntington's disease#Lead. Awadewit (talk) 21:48, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Kudos
Just read your signpost article. Kudos for taking the time to help out at the academy. The NIH was lucky to have such fine editors such as yourself, Tim, etc. on hand to introduce Wikipedia. TwilligToves (talk) 05:26, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 21:45, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, nice job. Scartol • Tok 22:20, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
A bit of help
I think I might be able to do the right thing here, but in all likelyhood, I would probably end up making at least one mistake. Do you think you could lend a hand at User talk:NuclearWarfare#"Not renewed" image? Thanks, NW (Talk) 04:01, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Done. Awadewit (talk) 21:49, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Teaching in the mornings
For your sharp pen, community interest, and old-school cluestick use, you are invited to join the Old Codgers' League. (which is not an invite-only group, but it's so hard to hear these days even when someone's talking right to ya...) +sj+ 15:10, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Cute. :) Awadewit (talk) 21:51, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Question on public domain image
I was at the Nixon library and they had on display Nixon's 1947 congressional ID, which I photographed and then cropped so as to get the picture. Would this be a public domain image? They also had the special passport they issued to him in 1947 when he toured Europe with the Herter Commission.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:07, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
- Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum - This one? If so, it is now a Federal museum. Therefore, it is all now public domain (or should be). Ottava Rima (talk) 14:11, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, but just because they are exhibiting something doesn't make it public domain. They have an exhibit of the covers of Time that Nixon appeared on, those aren't PD. For example, the campaign materials were copyright at the time. I doubt anyone renewed them, but ... My concern is that we don't know where the pictures on Nixon's ID and passport came from. I trust they don't tell a congressman to go to the drugstore and get passport photos, but who knows? I think the ID is more likely to be a government photo than the passport.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
- The Congressional ID is a production of the federal government, so that is PD (there is a special photo office for the Congress). I am inclined to think the passport would also be in the PD since it was issued by the federal government and it seems like it was produced by the them as well (no drugstore, as you say). However, I would suggest soliciting a second opinion on the passport from Elcobbola and/or Jappalang about the passport. Awadewit (talk) 17:51, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
- I will. The passport photo is larger and nicer! The thing is, all those early Nixon articles have a photo of Nixon from about 1957, I'd like something a little more contemporary. Nixon didn't have receding hairlines and jowls when he was in his thirties. Interestingly, I was looking at a display of Nixon 1968 buttons and many show Nixon as a much younger man. A little vain, I suspect.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:06, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
- The Congressional ID is a production of the federal government, so that is PD (there is a special photo office for the Congress). I am inclined to think the passport would also be in the PD since it was issued by the federal government and it seems like it was produced by the them as well (no drugstore, as you say). However, I would suggest soliciting a second opinion on the passport from Elcobbola and/or Jappalang about the passport. Awadewit (talk) 17:51, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, but just because they are exhibiting something doesn't make it public domain. They have an exhibit of the covers of Time that Nixon appeared on, those aren't PD. For example, the campaign materials were copyright at the time. I doubt anyone renewed them, but ... My concern is that we don't know where the pictures on Nixon's ID and passport came from. I trust they don't tell a congressman to go to the drugstore and get passport photos, but who knows? I think the ID is more likely to be a government photo than the passport.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
- I am not sure of the context behind the image in concern, so I presume the intent is to have an image of Nixon, circa 1947... The issue that could arise with using his congressional ID would be: was the potrait supplied by Nixon to Congress or did Congress arrange to have a photographer take a photo of Nixon? The former would be copyrighted to Nixon or his photographer, and the latter would be in public domain. Nonetheless, there is a National Park Service photo of Nixon in 1950 here (specific link). Jappalang (talk) 02:07, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, every PD photo of Nixon between 1945 and about 1957 has been challenged and knocked out when I've gone to FAC. The ID in question has a photograph which is rather small, perhaps 3/4 of an inch high. I doubt they would require a congressman to go seek and get such a picture. The Herter Commission Passport one looks to be a standard passport size. However, please keep in mind, this was before the era of common instant photos, and Nixon could not have walked down to the corner drugstore and gotten some shots over lunch, they would have had to have been developed the old fashioned way. I consider it very unlikely they were gotten by Nixon privately. Wondering if I should use these shots. Thanks for the photo, by the way, I will add it to the article shortly.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:10, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Media review
I currently have peer reviews opened for "We Are the World" (here) and Bubbles (chimpanzee) (here). They are both articles that I'm hoping to make FAs. I was wondering if you could check over the non-free files in the articles and perform a media review? This would ensure that the rationales are good enough for the future FACs, and possibly save time there as well. The peer reviews were only opened a few days ago, so there is no rush. Take as much as you need. Thanks. Pyrrhus16 20:21, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
- Done! Awadewit (talk) 01:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm leaving Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Stanford Memorial Church/archive2 to Karanacs because I'm too close to the topic in bad ways. I'm uncertain whether images are clear, so please drop a note on the FAC before Karanacs goes through on Tuesday? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:39, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
- Not sure why there is any uncertainty - I've been posting there every day recently. My oppose is unstruck. We are still waiting for OTRS confirmation on one image. Awadewit (talk) 20:43, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
HMS Endeavour
Thanks for your comments at Endeavour's FAC. I've replaced the Bayldon image with a nice-looking Atkins from 1794, which hopefully addresses your query. As suggested I've also asked John Hill to update the Commons licence on his photot _I'm not sure I agree with you re the need for this, but as the image has been replaced anyway its an academic discussion at this point. If he updates the licence I can at least use the image in future articles.
Any further suggestions or comments welcome. Euryalus (talk) 00:50, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- Revisited FAC. It is best to be meticulous about documentation for these images. If we get that now, there will be no issues in the future. Awadewit (talk) 02:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed, but don't strike your oppose just yet - John Hill has also updated the permission on the Commons page for his image, and I've put it back in the article, now in the "Replica" section. Feel free to let me know if this last-minute image swap has creates any issues. Euryalus (talk) 03:34, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- That is a funny edit by John. It is good to go. Awadewit (talk) 03:37, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed, but don't strike your oppose just yet - John Hill has also updated the permission on the Commons page for his image, and I've put it back in the article, now in the "Replica" section. Feel free to let me know if this last-minute image swap has creates any issues. Euryalus (talk) 03:34, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks again YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 02:53, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- My pleasure. Who knew about the Psychoactive toad?! Awadewit (talk) 03:10, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- Well I didn't. That's the other thing about FAR. A lot of the old ones need to be expanded a lot due to random coverage. Lake Burley Griffin and Australia at the Winter Olympics have taken more than 25 hours already. YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 03:14, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- That is an enormous amount of work. Perhaps you should be paid! :) Awadewit (talk) 03:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- Well, the idealistic thing about FAR is completely unrealistic. YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 03:24, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- Seriously. Let's all be Renaissance-people. Awadewit (talk) 03:37, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- Well, the idealistic thing about FAR is completely unrealistic. YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 03:24, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- That is an enormous amount of work. Perhaps you should be paid! :) Awadewit (talk) 03:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
- Well I didn't. That's the other thing about FAR. A lot of the old ones need to be expanded a lot due to random coverage. Lake Burley Griffin and Australia at the Winter Olympics have taken more than 25 hours already. YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 03:14, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Penda
Hi -- can you send me a pdf of whatever you have from the Bassett? Thanks! Mike Christie (talk) 22:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
The Anti-Flame Barnstar | |
| For your willingness to compromise without compromising quality, sourcing, or weight at the talk page of The Age of Reason. Moni3 (talk) 22:57, 3 August 2009 (UTC) |
Srsly, my head would have exploded weeks ago. Keep your chin up.
- I've never received that barnstar. :) Awesome. Awadewit (talk) 01:19, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
: 3 August 2009
- News and notes: WMF elections, strategy wiki, museum partnerships, and much more
- Wikipedia in the news: Dispute over Rorschach test images, and more
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:22, 4 August 2009 (UTC)