User talk:Earle Martin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Old talk:

• /2006

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 15:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rotherhithe Tunnel

Hi Earle,

You are correct that there is no blanket ban on linking YT links but the link in question is a copyvio because of the soundtrack. There is a blanket ban on linking copyvios and that YT video is therefore unacceptable. A silent video would be absolutely fine but I lack the ability/software to create one. If you can do this yourself, that would solve the problem. In the meantime I have removed the link again but would be happy to discuss. Thanks --Spartaz 06:37, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for your note. I was unaware the video actually had a soundtrack, so didn't realise it had a copyvio aspect. Next time I check a video I'll do it on my home machine, instead of this machine here at work... -- Earle Martin [^t/_c] 09:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism!

Thanks for adding a new one on my page! I've been lurking around from time to time, usually as an IP, but I haven't had the chance to see too many entertaining edits. That was a good one. Cheers! Tijuana Brass 01:11, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inversions

Noted with interest your deletion of alleged original research. I supppose you're probably correct although at least it was NPOV: i.e. (s)he was not trying to put forward a definitive answer as to why the book is called "Inversions". I would have though the title was a reference to the fact that it was a Culture novel written from the perspective of the world being Culturally infiltrated, i.e. the inverse of the usual but I guess that may be original research also.

--Lucifer 13:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi there - yeah, without a reference to something like a critical essay from a journal of literature, or an interview with the author, I tend to flag that sort of thing as OR wherever I see it. -- Earle Martin [^t/_c] 15:31, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Latymer Upper

I've responded to your Talk page query, if you would like to have a look over there. Regards, Chelseaboy 13:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gamelan instruments in category: Indonesian musical instruments

I have removed the automatic categorization in the {{gamelan-instrument}} template, as that includes some styles of singing and categories of instruments that are not appropriately at the category. I added the category manually to all the instruments included. I have not added Ugal to the template, as it is a Balinese instrument, and the template is only Javanese instruments (which are organized somewhat differently, I think, though my main reason is that I don't know as much about them). Rigadoun (talk) 19:53, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] fan POV on Felix Trinidad

Hey there as you saw I am having trouble dealing with 24.90.241.57 on Felix Trinidad's page, are a admin? if you are can you please explain to him the concept of W:NPOV I myself tried but it was pointless, I should not say this but he deserves a block for personal attacks. -Dark Dragon Flame 19:30, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Age category

Hello! If you are receiving this message, that means that your user page is in a specific year category. Per a recent user-category per deletion, all specific year categories are to be deleted. If you wish to continue using year categories, you have two options:

• Using an age group category, such as Category:Wikipedians in their 30s
• Using a decade category, such as Category:Wikipedians born in the 1970s.

If you wish, you may do both. Hopefully, this change in categorization will be quick and painless. Happy editing! --An automated message from MessedRobot 12:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Featured picture candidates

Could you please vote in my image?

--Ricardo Ramírez 21:58, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Use of wiki maintenance tags?

You applied a {{cleanup}} tag on Fawaz Naman Hamoud Abdallah Mahdi.

When cleanup tags are instantiated they tell readers to look on the associated talk page for a discussion of the issues that triggered the tag. Most tags impose this responsibility on the person who places them. This time was just an oversight, right?

Cheers! -- Geo Swan 19:42, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] UAE Hate Sites

Those sites exist only in the Internet. Those are not registered as organization either in Network Solution or UAE Government, or even your government. They exist only as organization in your imagination. Are you doing this just because those websites are censored by the UAE Government? what do you call that ? bias? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nadirss (talk • contribs) 21:59, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RFA sections problem

While I appreciate your desire to enable section editing on your RFA, there's a reason that they aren't generally used; check out the current TOC on WP:RFA to see if you can spot why. it's a limitation of the software, but you may want to revert your changes before someone gives you even more grief (there's a kludge to get around it, but it's generally not worth it once the RFA has started). -- nae'blis 21:43, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• I've already removed the section headers. --Durin 22:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

  Thank you both, this was an issue I was (obviously) unaware of. -- Earle Martin [^t/_c] 22:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your RfA

I just wanted to say that I'm truly sorry it looks as if your RfA won't pass. Upon thinking about your RfA for some time (far more than I should have, really, as I don't think about WP a lot anymore), Kim Bruning's comment is spot on- you are, hands down, the finest candidate I can recall in quite a long time. Also echoing Kim's comments, you do speak like a person as opposed to a Wikipedian, which is very refreshing (and something I generally try to do). You deserve tons of credit for all of your contributions to the hill of beans in this crazy world that constitutes Wikipedia. -- Kicking222 01:55, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your RFA

Hi! I have closed your RFA as it does not enjoy the support of the community at this moment. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 04:00, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your RFA

I'm very sorry that your RFA didn't pass, when I feel you really should have been sysoped. I have a suggestion for next time, and that is wait for someone to nominate you. Who knows, the third time can be magic. The Evil Clown ^{my contributions} 21:04, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your RFA

Gone. Sorry. I am deeply disappointed (but not surprised) by the process. --BozMo talk 15:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] One man's crime is another man's artwork

It is all relative you see. David Spart (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) 21:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)