User talk:JohnInDC
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, JohnInDC, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! MartinRe 22:08, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Cranbrook Kingswood School
I see Tawker has replied to you on your IP page (User talk:167.176.6.8), just thought I'd also add a comment. If the person in question has an article on wikipedia, and is a valid alumni, then I would't see a problem with adding them (unless the alumni list was very long) Whether the person is notable enough to have an article on wikipedia is a separate issue (WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC are some guidelines) (Personally, I think Suai_Kee is iffy, (signed, but no album), if it was brought to WP:AFD is might be deleted, it might not.)
In general, though, every dispute that isn't vandalism is a content dispute, and the first thing to do is discuss it, either on user talk pages, or on the article talk pages. Then, discuss it again :) Remember to assume good faith, if people explain their reasoning to each other it's a lot easier to work out a result than in/out, hokey-cokey edits :):) Regards, MartinRe 22:32, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. I understand generally what you're saying. It does seem sort of circular, though - they're sufficiently notable alumni if they have a Wikipedia entry, but it's not clear that they're notable enough to warrant the entry in the first place. Beyond that, my beef, such as it is, is that the other 'notables' are well-known, accomplished, mid-to-late career kinds of folks. A singer with a record contract who hasn't even released an album yet - well . . . JohnInDC 00:13, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- Not circular, let me explain more clearly:
- There are two questions:
- Is Suai Kee notable enough for a wiki article?
- Should there be a link to Suai Kee from the school article?
- The first question should be answered on its own merits WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, etc. The second question does depends on the answer from the first, if she's deemed to be notable enough, she probably deserves a link, but the first question doesn't depend on the second. Circular logic would, arguging that she's notable because she'd linked from the school. (More extreme circular logic would suggest that she's notable because someone created an article, so she requires an article because she's notable, but that's refuted ever time I've seen it used)
- If you feel the article in question isn't notable enough for a wiki entry, based on WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC as a rough guide, you are welcome to nominate it for deletion, either using {{subst:prod|reason}}, if you feel it will be uncontested, or for discussion on WP:AFD otherwise. (It has enough of a claim for notability not to be a speedy to me) Wikipedia:Guide to deletion has information on this. Regards, MartinRe 09:59, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay. Call it "semi-circular" then. Or "unhelpfully self-referential": It is evidently appropriate, under some interpretation of Wikipedia rules or culture, to include her on the 'notable alumni' because she has a Wikipedia entry. But under Wikipedia rules, that entry itself is of doubtful validity. This is wholly unpersuasive on the issue of whether she deserves inclusion on the first list.
I don't care whether Suai Kee is sufficiently notable to deserve a Wikipedia page, and especially not enough to go to the trouble of challenging the entry. What I *do* care about is not cluttering up a list of 'notable alumni' with people who've never actually *done* anything. (If every alum that had ever signed a book or record contract were included on it, it would string on for pages.) And it's a mystery to me why any decision about inclusion on the list (which plainly represents some higher degree of accomplishment than "maybe something someday later") depends on as random a fact as whether someone has bothered to construct an entry for her elsewhere on Wikipedia.
I find this very frustrating, but I do appreciate that you continue to discuss it. JohnInDC 14:17, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Whats the criteria for Notable? A recording contract with and internationally known Label? A nationally known company? A candidate for a national public office? --Elatanatari 23:26, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
I've responded at Talk:Cranbrook_Schools JohnInDC 23:51, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image tagging for Image:Holy rood.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Holy rood.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:04, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Graduation
What year did u graduate in?
- 1972 - which makes me, well, almost ancient I guess
- JohnInDC 23:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wolverine
Hi, I'm relatively new to Wiki so I didn't know how to link videos and citations. I could post them here, and you could help me a bit?
I know that that particular concept is cliche, but although new, I hope you're confident that your efforts will be directed in a just manner.
Wolverine fighting wolf pack among others on left tab: [1]
Some polar bears sharing a kill with a wolverine: [2]
I can't seem to find any resources relatable to my addition in respect to wolverines being able to ambush moose from a tree, but I have seen it once on a documentary at home. It might have been a deer however, so I don't think it should be added in relation to the moose.
As for my addition in respect to the wolverine's enemies being weary because of potential eye gouging, I think after you watch the video I sent you, (fighting 1) you'll agree with me.63.135.9.214/Internethero 14:16, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I'm no good at links myself. I did take a look at those videos - the one of the wolverine fighting wolves off its kill was certainly interesting. The other one, with the polar bears - well, I had trouble seeing a wolverine there at all! And as far as eye-gouging and the like - I think it's probably sufficient to say in the article that wolverines are very fierce and intimidating (whatever the thing already says) and able to take on much larger animals. And, you know, eye-gouging is a problem but so is nose-slashing and ear-ripping. It's hard to say which of these might be of the greatest concern to a competing predator! JohnInDC 19:16, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I'll put the one where he's fighting 2 wolves instead for a video representation. I don't think it would hurt this article. Also, I am absolutely sure that wolverines hide on tree branches waiting in ambush. I've completed about 3 school projects on wolverines and have read about 10 books of varying levels. I have actually seen it on a documentary.
For instance, on little cranny of knowledge that most people don't know is that the beaver is most adept to fighting a wolverine besides a grizzly or black bear near a rock.
Check out this little mink though.[3]
Do you think it was the eyes or nose?
The way you said it was more clear. I have a tendency of saying my words like
robot. ie., respect to/in relation to (very cold), lol. good job!
Glad you liked it. I think it fits in very nicely now. Thanks for that video link. JohnInDC 04:34, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Cranbrook Schools
Hello, thanks for the note, I forgot about that other picture when I used the infobox template. It was further down in the article and off the screen. Out of sight, out of mind. :) I put it back, but just floating in the text, instead of inside that box. Take a look at this edit to see the syntax, and if there is a better location, be WP:BOLD and move it. WP:IMAGE also has information about how to wikicode pictures. Thanks. — MrDolomite • Talk 16:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
