User talk:Orangemonster2k1/archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 Re: My Apologizes 2 UBX template 3 RE: Need a little help 4 Your VandalProof Application 5 WHAG-TV 6 Uncategorised radio stations 7 Re: Cumberland, Maryland 8 Re: Cumberland, MD Radio/Utilities/Links 9 News Channel 8 Reply 10 Re: Need Help 11 Sign your posts on talk pages 12 68.163.44.246 13 Welcome to VandalProof! 14 141.154.10.193 15 Re: 141... 16 RE: FOX Television Stations 17 Hillary, the JeffSite! 18 Editors that don't provide an edit summary tend to look like vandals 19 A Man in Black 20 RE: Reverts 21 Orphaned fair use image (Image:Tv3winchesteronline2.jpg) 22 Thanks 23 WTBZ 24 I was just wondering 25 WTAE 26 Logos 27 ATHF/Devices 28 WKMM-WFSP 29 Image:Spacecataz.JPG 30 Re: Question 31 Re: ATHF/Adult Swim Apology 32 Evanescence 33 Re: Shakti Gawain 34 KXGN 35 Ohio/WV radio stations 36 Sorry for the confusion 37 TV schedules 38 RFC on Calton 39 Forum link 40 Re: Question 41 100000watts 42 Brief comments 43 Re:WNEP 44 Things came out okay 45 Re: The Wiki Puzzle Logo 46 User talk pages 47 Thank you! 48 Interwikis 49 Thanks! 50 Radio 51 Removing AfD tags 52 Comments 53 No personal attacks 54 Revert 55 Metro 232's Talk Page 56 Don't worry - I got your post 57 RE:Help 58 Don't sweat it 59 Orphaned fair use image (Image:Img49.gif) 60 Orphaned fair use image (Image:WkmmHeader.jpg) 61 Userbox 62 Reply 63 Calton's talk page 64 Re: Calton 65 Re: Cumberland/sup v. ref 65.1 Paragraph 65.1.1 References 66 WPXI 67 Butch 68 Warning

Re: My Apologizes

I accept your apology. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:13, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

UBX template

A good way to start is with a template already made. Just take on of them, copy the code, and edit it with your own text and image. Remember: do not use copyrighted images in userboxes. All the images in userboxes must be free to use and redistribute. You can also use words instead of an image: for example if you have a UBX about Cheerios, write the words Cheerios instead of using the copyrighted Cheerios logo. Make sure you credit where you copied the code from. Also make sure you make it under your username (for example, User:Orangemonster2k1/Cheerios would be a good name). Just tell me if you have any questions, please! Scepia 06:03, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

RE: Need a little help

Since WTBO appears to be the main station, I assume you would create a redirect from WFRB. In that case, just put #REDIRECT[[WTBO]] in the editing box for WFRB. It's actually not that hard to do once you get the hang of it. Hope this helps! --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:38, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Your VandalProof Application

Dear Orangemonster2k1,

Thank you for applying for VandalProof! (VP). As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that you don't yet have the minimum of 250 mainspace edits. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank you for your interest in VandalProof.

WHAG-TV

Good morning!

I was curious as to the rationale of restoring the behind-the-scenes folks to the WHAG-TV article. While they are an important contribution to the on-air product of the station, generally speaking, local television articles have been used for listing on-air talent only. When we start listing behind-the-scenes folks, we run the risk of violating WP:NOT a directory. I think you'll find that, with the majority of station entries, on-air talent (and -- in some cases -- upper management) is all there is.

Please let me know your thoughts, and hopefully, we can reach some sort of consensus on the matter. Amnewsboy 15:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

If they're formerly on the news team and/or listed on the Web site, I think you'd be justified in leaving them on. Truthfully, I'm not 100% sold on it, but I can roll with it. :) (I'd make a note of it on the talk page, though, just in case somebody else comes through with the same mindset.) Amnewsboy 18:21, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Uncategorised radio stations

Looks to me like those articles are categorised now, via the template, but had no categories at all when the 'bot tagged them, so no great mystery there. If you feel you're done categorising them, then go ahead and remove the tag. Alai 04:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Cumberland, Maryland

I have only resized and moved the images to non obtrusive places. The article should be useful for everyone, not a collage of many users. There were images set in frames and even one resized at 500px. While it may be nice to have your picture taking all the screen, it is not for casual readers who come there. I did not remove any image, though, but manage to resize them all. Remember, the images should complement the text, not the way around.

In fact, the article is so long it should be splitted into several ones. As for the links, while I agree they are useful for people living in Cumberland, they were excessive and did not help a casual user who just arrived to the article. Imagine if New York or Washington, D.C. began listing every business situated in those places. -- ReyBrujo 13:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

• Hi. The problem is that on-line 'wiki' content is divided into 'types'. Wikipedia itself is intended to include information similar to what you would find in an 'Encyclopedia Brittanica'... certainly including an article on Cumberland, but not lists of individual restaurants and the like. There is a separate 'Wiktionary' project for dictionary definitions and lexicography, a 'Wikisource' project for online texts and records, et cetera. And there is also a project for online 'city guides' of the sort you have been trying to build on the Wikipedia page. See the Wikia 'cities' project here. It doesn't look like they have an entry for Cumberland yet. My suggestion would be to move most of the external links and text about local attractions which aren't major enough to warrant their own Wikipedia articles there and then just include a single link to that site on the Wikipedia article. --CBD 12:10, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
• The Open Directory Project is a website directory, the largest, is free and run by volunteers. I suggest suggesting links there. [2] —Wrathchild ^(talk) 17:15, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Cumberland, MD Radio/Utilities/Links

I have added the templates back until we get feedback from others. The links will have to be moved to an open directory, as we are not a telephone guide. However, I can accept having them there until they are moved (this does not imply I would revert if someone else removes them, and would even support removing them, however I would not actively remove them unless there is no need for them). I will keep the page watched, will remove any new external link added, and will remove links as they appear in Dmoz. Again, I won't prevent anyone from removing them all if they do so, but won't do that myself, at least in a month (if the article keeps all these links for a month and haven't been moved somewhere else, it will be clear that people are not actively working to keep the entry clear, but instead they are just happy having them there, which shows a lack of compromise). -- ReyBrujo 12:25, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Creating articles, even stubs, for those radios that do not have articles is much better than just naming them in the Cumberland article, yes. That way, even anonymous users can contribute to the articles (as they can't create them). -- ReyBrujo 13:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

News Channel 8 Reply

Thanks. Since becoming a Wikipedia member in February of 2005, I have focused most of my edits on TV stations. You can imagine the amount of changes that I made during the WB / UPN / MyNetworkTV transition. See my user page, which has a listing of the TV stations that I have edited.

Re: Need Help

Hi. Thanks for your message. I've added the IP to my VandalProof blacklist and will see what I can do. Matthuxtable 16:45, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Sign your posts on talk pages

As a courtesy for other editors, it is a Wikipedia guideline to sign your talk page and user talk page posts. To do so simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments and your user name or IP address and the date will be automatically added along with a timestamp. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). For further info read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Thank you. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 17:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

No worries, mate! Keep up the great work! If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 17:51, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

68.163.44.246

Just to let you know, I am pretty sure the person that is currently tagging radio stations for speedy deletion, is the same person I was dealing with earlier under IP 68.163.27.43. I have many of the stations on watch and will keep an eye on them. Thanks for your help :o)

Rock on....SVRTVDude 18:08, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Good to know someone's watching :-). Just a couple things about you

1. I think you might want to start with lower level warnings when warning vandals (for example, you used a test3 here after only one "test" edit. Overall though, great work!
2. Have you considered using a program such as Wikipedia:VandalProof to make vandal reverts easier?

—Mets501 (talk) 18:14, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you do have over 250 mainspace edits, so you can apply :-) —Mets501 (talk) 18:55, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Orangemonster2k1! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 19:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

141.154.10.193

Sorry, I was out for a while. Looks like they've stopped for now, if they continue, I'll block. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: 141...

Ok, I will watch that IP. Academic Challenger 00:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

RE: FOX Television Stations

Thank you for the compliment! --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:38, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Hillary, the JeffSite!

Maybe the pic is large, and I will consider reducing the size. However, you have asked me to ADD a political caption, when I REMOVED the political caption BEFORE the admin in question reverted me a SECOND time! Forgive me, but now I am more confused than ever! Jeffpw 19:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

• Well, I didn't open it. Zoe did, when she abused her administrative power to change my page, in spite of having no real policy to back up her actions, and in spite of clear policy stating that userpages should be discussed, and not changed without consensus.

Some users are fine with their user pages being edited, and may even have a note to that effect. Other users may object and ask you not to edit their user pages, and it is probably sensible to respect their requests. The best option is to draw their attention to the matter on their talk page and let them edit their user page themselves if they agree on a need to do so. In some cases a more experienced editor may make a non-trivial edit to your userpage, in which case that editor should leave a note on your talk page explaining why this was done. This should not be done for trivial reasons.

• No worries. I have not at any point thought you were in the slightest bit rude. You seems a helpful colleague and a good editor. By the way, My dream nomination is Clinton/Obama, though I wonder if that would be too much change for the American public to swallow in one go. One can hope, though. Jeffpw 18:52, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Editors that don't provide an edit summary tend to look like vandals

I have noticed you commonly don't enter an edit summary as you didn't when you edited Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism (see this edit). This causes me problems. When I patrol for vandalism, I use the summary to make a preliminary decision on whether or not the post is a vandal edit or not. If the summary is present (or at least a section header, the part inside the /* */), I commonly decide the edit is legit and move on.

However, if no edit summary is available, I typically resort to loading the diff for the edit. This takes time. For that reason, if your edits are all valid, I ask that you provide edit summaries. For more on how to enter an edit summary, please read Help:Edit summary.

Incidentally, it is not just me that appreciate having edit summaries. When you omit your summary, you may be telling various bots that you are vandalizing pages. For this reason, please consider providing that summary. It is very important. You can enter that summary via the edit summary box on edit pages (as shown below).

From what I saw, you appear to rely on automated summaries like those generated by Vandal Proof and AES (appears as "←" in summaries). The change you made that I listed had no such summary. From what I understand, Vandal Proof does not provide summaries on WP:AIV. From what I have seen, AES is only active when the page is created, blanked, or replaced. Will (Talk - contribs) 23:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I knew that as soon as I saw your diff and contribs. Until then though… Will (Talk - contribs) 23:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

A Man in Black

WP:AN would be a good place to take this. Have you tried talking to him? If not, you should do that before going to the Administrators' Noticeboard. Academic Challenger 05:32, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

RE: Reverts

I'm already aware that it is part of a greater issue; I had already seen the contribs for the IP that made the WBZ/KATV vandalism by the time you informed me (and it had also touched articles for WUSA, KXTV, KUSA, WVII, and several others using that IP alone!). Thanks for the reminder, though! --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:02, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Tv3winchesteronline2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Tv3winchesteronline2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 06:22, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

You don't have to notify me about any notices you get about orphaned fair use images, they will be removed in 7 days. If you ever want to remove a page or image you created just add "{{db-self}}" to the top of the page and an admin will come by and remove it shortly . BJ^Talk 06:36, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

I would like to thank you for creating some of the radio station articles in West Virginia. I created over half of the radio articles for WV and I'm glad to know that there is someone else that can also do it. Oh yeah, I saw you make posts on wvbroadcasting.net. I'm on there too, my screenname is ThePunkWV. Thanks again! The Punk 06:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

WTBZ

WTBZ is the old country station in Grafton, right? No, sorry I don't have a logo for. Did you try searching it on Google? The Punk 06:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I couldn't help ya out. The old Z country probably never had a website. Yeah, I'm pretty sure it is K-Love now. The Punk 07:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I remember my grandfather used to listen to it when my grandparents lived near Fairmont. I remember him telling me that it was syndicated out of Branson Missouri. I created a K-Love page too on here for 93.3 in Charleston, but I can't remember the call sign tough. The Punk 07:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I think they did syndicate with them at one time, but they probably switched affiliations a couple of times before going to K-Love. It probably had too much competition with WKKW and WBRB. He used to listed to WTUS and WPDX too before they moved to Georgia. WFRB is a strong station. Couple of times I was able to receive it (depending on how I positioned the antenna) when I lived 15 minutes south of Elkins in a community called Valley Bend. The Punk 08:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I was just wondering

How well can you hear the Washington D.C. radio stations in Winchester? The Punk 05:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

So I guess you can get a lot of stations there? Is it the same way in Martinsburg and can you get WWDC there too? So you were able to hear WKKW and WELK come in on a clear day? I always love hearing when another station tries to come in and take over the stations that you normally hear, but they always fade away. A long time ago, when I lived near Elkins, I heard WKKW being over taken for a short period of time by WNCI from Columbus. The Punk 06:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

This past summer WKWS from Charleston was interfering a lot with another country station in Oklahoma. The weird part was, I was almost right on top of Charleston. And another summer back in the day at my old house near Elkins, a lot of stations were coming in from Montana and North Dakota for a few minutes, then they faded away. Oh, yeah almost forgot to ask. Do you work for WINC? Just wondering.The Punk 06:59, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

WTAE

I have to ask -- are WTAE's pre-emptions encyclopedia-worthy? I ask because many stations around the country re-arrange/move/etc. their Saturday morning block to accomodate weekend AM news... many others preempt or rearrange their morning schedules for syndicated programming or newscasts. I'm just not sure that the situations presented there are so unique to the station that they should be noted in their article. (I also don't know if the leaving of one anchor is worthy for inclusion, given that people in this business come and go on a regular basis.) Let's work something out. Amnewsboy 06:43, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

It looks good... I did do a grammar tweak... but I still have qualms about leaving the anchor in there -- unless he was there for, like, the station's entire history, I'm just not sure it should be included (anchors leave stations -- even ones they've been at for a while -- every day). I also wonder about leaving the "Hello News" jingle in... I think it's fine to leave that they used the campaign, but that particular promo (with the sports teams and the local celebrities) was used EVERYWHERE they used that promo -- and that's a lot of places. Amnewsboy 08:51, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Looks good -- thanks for the help! Amnewsboy 10:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Logos

In relation to the message you left on my talk page, I'm forming a group that will do the job of A Man in Black and remove galleries of fair use images...but not delete all of them (instead, if I can find room, I place them alongside the history in the correct chronological order). Would you like to help? ViperSnake151 18:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, even if you do this it seems they he will still delete them. See the recent edit history of WUSA (TV). Also see Wikipedia:Fair use/Historical logos in galleries for the RFC I filed about this issue. This administrator is acting without consensus of any type (and he believes his actions trump consensus). DHowell 21:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

ATHF/Devices

Can you add a Wiki link toward the top so people kind find them easier? I added that Wiki link at the top (was going to take it down later this evening). - SVRTVDude 22:29, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary; there's a link in the table of contents. -- tariqabjotu 22:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

WKMM-WFSP

Good stuff, Tybois. What I will do is add a stub link for every station, so If anybody knows any more info they can add on to it. The weird thing between WKMM and WFSP is that where I used to live I was able to receive WKMM better than WFSP even though WKMM has only 300 watts and WFSP has over 1,000 watts. The Punk 01:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

So I guess the reason why WKMM only has 300 watts of power is because of the height of the tower. Good call Ty, I never thought of it that way. The Punk 02:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I think there is also a station located on 96.5 in Johnstown. Probably not, but I wonder If it will slam WKMM around the Bruceton Mills area. The Punk 02:54, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I didn't think it would, since Johnstown is too far northeast. I can't get WRRK/Bob FM here at all. Sometimes on 96.9 I can get WXBQ from Bristol, Tennessee, however. But most of the time 96.9 is static. Believe it or not, some Pittsburgh stations can come in way down here every once in a while. Couple of times I was able to hear WXDK/The X @ 105.9 and WAMO 106.7. The Punk 03:12, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm a rock fan too! The Punk 03:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Spacecataz.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Spacecataz.JPG. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 03:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

There is a free-license alternative of the ATHF LEDs on flickr[3], I've uploaded it to commons in order to replace your screen caps from the newsfeed. I understand that you went through some effort to find, describe, and upload these images, but it's against Wikipedia's fair use policy to simply appropriate any copyrighted image when there's a free alternative. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 03:24, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

(On a side note, TV screencaps are considered fair use images since they are copyrighted and unlicensed) ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 03:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

"Screenshots are taken via the free airwaves, hence free." No, I'm sorry, but you are grossly misinformed in making that generalization. Television stations retain all rights to programs they broadcast over public airways, anyone who makes use of their programming must have the copyright holder's permission, a license that allows redistribution, or a strong fair use claim as outlined in the relevant provisions of the Copyright Act of 1976. In the case of Wikipedia use, the policy is simple: if a free alternative exists or can be created, it must be used, with no exceptions. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 03:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I am not looking to argue with you, I responded simply to inform you of Wikipedia policy and copyright law. You may hold on to whatever misconceptions that you would like, but please note that repeatedly violating Wikipedia image use policy may constitute vandalism or disruption. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 03:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry for the accusatory tone, the 3RR warning is a only a formality. I am aware that you are trying to productively contribute to Wikipedia. It appears, however, that you have previously come into conflict with regards to image copyright and use. I would like to suggest that you take a few minutes to read over fair use criteria. Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia, gratuitous fair use images are discouraged and the total of unlicensed copyrighted content should be kept to a minimum. Luckily, there are many avenues for obtaining free-license imagery to use in articles. Flickr, for one, is a great resource, and there are numerous Creative Commons-licensed images of the ATHF LEDs that are adequate at illustrating the article in question. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 03:54, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok :) ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 04:01, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Question

Not unless the copyright for the logo has lapsed. Many images published between 1923 and 1963 (& all prior to 1923) are now in the public domain because no one renewed the copyright. However without explicit confirmation of copyright status, it's best to assume that all of these are fair use images as far as Wikipedia policy is concerned. Creating new versions of these old logos would constitute creating derivative works, this would also infringe on the original copyright. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 11:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use with permission is not allowed (see this for explanation). Wikipedia policy does allow the fair use claim of a logo, but I am not sure of the policy regarding fair use claims for multiple logos/identifying marks. I suspect that if there is a significant amount of critical commentary on the history of the logo then a fair use claim could be postulated, but this is a gray area, and most veteran contributors tend to lean on the side of caution. You are probably better off discussing this issue at Wikipedia talk:Fair use. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 12:38, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Transforming logos into free material is pretty much impossible, many of them don't ever even expire because of trademark law. There are legal provisions for their use, and I think that fair use applies here, but Wikipedia has its own policy that adds extra requirements. Again, I'm not sure what to suggest to you in this situation. You could try to draft a blanket fair use rationale for these logos and submit it for review at Wikipedia talk:Fair use. Be careful though, veteran Wikipedia contributors can be very pedantic, so you might want to brush up on WP:IUP, WP:FU(&WP:FUC), trademark law, & fair use before you submit any proposal. Welcome to the beureaucracy. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 13:06, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: ATHF/Adult Swim Apology

I saw an item on the news here in the Netherlands about the "panic" in Boston. At the very end they showed the LED board and I recognized it immediately. So I started searching for more news. Wikipedia had something about it (of course). I always correct typos on Wikipedia since I'm not yet confident enough to do large changes, even although you should be bold.

Anyways, glad I could help ; ) --JVersteeg 18:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Evanescence

Hi. Looks like you like Evanescence and you may be interesed in joining its WikiProject. Please consider joining the Evanescence WikiProject, an effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage and detail regarding Evanescence. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks that you can help with. Thank you!!!

I've seen you are a good editor and I hope you join.  Armando.O  ^{(talk|contribs)} 04:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Check out the Open tasks here, and if you wanna be a member, add the userbox or just add yourself to the category (more info here.  Armando.O  ^{(talk|contribs)} 18:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Shakti Gawain

Hiya. Thanks for your message about my tagging the article on'Shakti Gawain'. I don't doubt that she is a big cheese within her field, but I nominated it for deletion because the article itself doesn't give any references that prove it. The only link is to her own website, and I'm afraid that doesn't count. If she has sold millions of books, put up a link to somewhere that can verify this and you'll be fine.

Cheers, Chris 09:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

KXGN

Just trying to show that KXGN is a dual-affiliated station that airs NBC programming,

Which you do by saying "KXGN is a dual-affiliated station that airs NBC programming."

..but actually show what NBC programming they air. They air shows off-schedule (My Name is Earl and The Office are aired on Saturdays).

Uh huh. And as Wikipedia is not TV Guide, the point of documenting their exact programming schedule is what, exactly?

Having to add all these references is just annoying.

As is seeing the entire schedule reproduced. It's ludicrously pointless detail, not even useful to readers who happen to be viewers in KXGN's own market. --Calton | Talk 05:41, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Do a Google search, you will see KXGN is something of a legend, if you will, on radio and TV sites. Even having it's own page on TVNewsTalk.net for a short time...even though it was started as a joke, it expanded. They dropped it when TVNT went down for a couple weeks.

Uh huh. And the point of this ramble -- utterly unconnected as it is from anything mentioned so far -- is what, exactly? --Calton | Talk 05:49, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

::Just making a point....no need to be rude

For the third time, what point are you trying to make? Asking to you to explain yourself instead of slapping irrelevancies onto my Talk page is NOT rude, but you're pushing me in that direction.

Let's make it simple: no explanation, no schedule. --Calton | Talk 06:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

"Just trying to show that KXGN is a dual-affiliated station that airs NBC programming, but actually show what NBC programming they air.

Which, to recap "you do by saying 'KXGN is a dual-affiliated station that airs NBC programming.'"

They air shows off-schedule (My Name is Earl and The Office are aired on Saturdays).

So? You could show that by writing "They air shows off-schedule (My Name is Earl and The Office are aired on Saturdays)."

KXGN is the only station in the nation to have affiliation (sp) of 2 of the "Big 3" Networks.

A statement which doesn't require a schedule.

Saying that they air "select" NBC programs tells the reader nothing,...

Not even wrong.

... saying they air only the 10pmEST/9pmMST programs would be false, saying that they only broadcast programs from NBC aired that day would also be false as stated above.

Again, so? Telling readers that they give away free ponies on Friday nights would also be false and as equally relevant as your examples.

A schedule shows the reader the very unique situation that is KXGN's prime-time programming.

First, there's no such thing as "very unique": it's unique, or it isn't. Second, describing their schedule shifting does not require anywhere near the level of obsessive detail you're bringing in -- including the syndicated show schedule -- any more than explaining the predominance of Irish-Americans in the FDNY requires listing every surname in the department.

Something that is best described with a schedule. Most readers that don't leave in Glendive will probably never come across a station like this, so explaining it this way is, I feel, best and easier than a long-winded paragraph.

Most readers -- and certainly almost every reader outside the United States -- won't give a rat's ass about the subtlety of the shifting of specific shows from their specific customary time slots, since they they won't know -- and won't care -- what those time slots are. --Calton | Talk 07:03, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I am working with A Man in Black on this one, so that all the references are up to Wiki's standards. He has requested a reference that says that KXGN is the only station that airs both CBS and NBC programming or is the only station that airs any programming from any of the "Big 3" networks...if you would like to help out, I would appericate a little help looking that information up.

None of which has the slightest bearing on whether the complete schedule is appropriate to begin with. Oh, and don't forget WP:OWN. --Calton | Talk 07:03, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Did you PM me just to argue?

No, I am responding to your damned continual posts on my Talk page and asking for for reasons I shouldn't delete the schedule-cruft from the KXGN article -- which you are NOT providing.

I started it, so...um...yeah it is mine to end.

Again, take a read of WP:OWN whenever you get the chance. Short answer: no. --Calton | Talk 07:30, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

As I have said before, I never said I "owned" the KXGN article...

Your messages to A Man in Black suggest otherwise.

...but am working to add references to it so that the schedule may remain

Again, you're completely missing the point: the schedules don't belong, period/full stop, whether you have no references or 100 references. --Calton | Talk 07:39, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, if you look, I am giving him links, he tells me "no", I keep looking....I asked AMIB if a different reference would be acceptable. Since he is an admin and you (and I) are editors, he outrules you on whether something stays or goes. So, when I find that reference, it goes back up. No period, no full stop...what AMIB tells me, goes. Sorry

A whole lot of nonsense, but let me concentrate on the one big one: he removed the schedule with the edit summary Still not TV Guide, but the one useful reference is good here. That's not saying "it needs a reference to include the schedule", it's saying "the schedule doesn't belong because Wikipedia is not TV Guide". Or, as he notes explicitly "We don't need the schedule to establish that". Still doing "what AMIB tells" you? --Calton | Talk 07:51, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Once again, he said nothing about the inclusion of the schedule itself. --Calton | Talk 07:58, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Ohio/WV radio stations

Thanks for fixing those. Trouble is those were both categorised as Cat:Television stations in Ohio, so the 'bot was thereby fooled. I think the trouble is that some people are using these as "serving parts of", whereas others take them as meaning "actually physically in". Alai 10:15, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion

I actually don't know anything about TV stations... but it was not you that I was worried about, it was the anonymous IP which is a likely sockpuppet of User:BenH. I was doing some vandalism patrolling when I came across this user.. it appears he has been and continues to make many many subtle edits, a few of which are good, but many of which are just made up or downright wrong or cannot be verified by any sources on the internet. The user never used edit summaries or talk pages, so thats one reason he was blocked, and now has many editors trying to stop his sockpopettering for good. Since you edit these pages you should watch out for him and be wary of his edits, although hopefully he won't be around much longer. Danski14 00:59, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

If you want you can post them on my talk page. Also, if you see any of those IPs making those kind of edits, you could tag them with {{sockpuppet|BenH}}. If the user responds, then it's most likely not BenH, but if it is it would be nice to hear his side of the story. Anyways, I'm kindof new on the anti-vandalism scene, and this is more of an issue to be delt with by admins I guess, who can trace IPs (see WP:SOCK)). It's also probably the strangest case I've seen so far. Danski14 01:28, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

TV schedules

Hi Orange,

I saw your comments on WP:AN. Please do not add schedules to local TV station articles. As you must be aware by now, Wikipedia policy (specifically WP:NOT forbids TV Guide-style schedules, although we have been allowed national programming grids. I understand the station is notable as being the last local station to be affiliated with more than one of the Big Three Television Networks, but some editors feel a blanket approach to the policy is best.

As far as user:Calton goes, I agree some of the comments have been overly aggressive, and will leave a note. Meanwhile, just go back to editing your usual articles (without adding the schedule, naturally). Happy editing, Firsfron of Ronchester 02:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

RFC on Calton

I'm helping to flesh out the RFC on Calton's behavior. Thank you for getting this much-needed process started. You should endorse the RFC, by adding your signature under "Users certifying the basis for this dispute". rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 09:04, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Forum link

Hello. Please refrain from entering that forum link onto Wikipedia articles. See the {{spam}} template for more information. Thanks in advance. El_C 10:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Question

Hi - use  tags. ^(Yell) becomes ^(Yell). Hope that helps. Cipher ^(Yell) 11:05, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Go into My Preferences - put this in your signature:

[[User:Orangemonster2k1|SVRTVDude]] <sup>([[User talk:Orangemonster2k1|Yell]])</sup>

Select Raw Signature. That should work. Cipher ^(Yell) 14:04, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

100000watts

I'm not sure...seems like a reputable source. --CFIF ☎ ⋐ 14:40, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd think it would be reputable as well. Ntropolis 21:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I haven't used 100000watts ever since M Street bought it from Chip Kelley and started charging subscriptions. Chip did his best I'm sure, but the data were not always accurate, especially for TV stations' affiliations, so I refused to subscribe. Apparently, Scott Fybush is the news editor, or was as of April 2005 - he's publisher of NorthEast Radio Watch and highly respected - and in a bulletin board forum, he claims that the data are now being compiled by researchers whose job is to call around to get info and to scour the news releases. So apparently, there are processes in place that could make the site a reliable source, whereas I wouldn't have said so when it was a free site. I guess the best thing would be to contact 100000watts.com and ask what kinds of auditing is in place that would make the site reliable. Having read Scott's post and knowing his reputation, I may just sign up for a short trial subscription myself just to see how it's changed in the last 5 years or so. dhett (talk • contribs) 00:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Brief comments

Hi Orange,

Thanks for your notes. I agree several of Calton's comments were incivil. I'm not sure a request for comment was needed at this point. Wikipedia is huge, with well over 1.5 million articles. There are over 2,000 TV station articles alone. I feel like the encyclopedia is large enough that two users who disagree with one another can still continue to edit Wikipedia without ever having to bump into each other on a regular basis, so an RFC is/should be a last resort. On another note, please don't remove tags like this. Weigh in on the discussion page, but don't remove tags. Anyway, happy editing, Firsfron of Ronchester 04:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Orange,

Thanks for your note. It sounds like, aside from a few incivil comments, you have a good attitude and I look forward to seeing further good contributions from you. The RFC process is long and drawn out, and I can only hope it will result in a solution that will be acceptable for all parties. Best wishes, Firsfron of Ronchester 06:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Re:WNEP

Thanks for the props bro! Hope I did this right, Still new to me!Heartbreak 08:25, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Things came out okay

Try not to be worked up over Calton anymore. It won't help to respond every time he says something about you; it just gives him an opportunity to say even more. Let one salvo pass you by and it will almost certainly stop after that.

I mean, I want to reply to his RfC response and say how full of crap he is. It would be immensely satisfying for about five minutes. But then my reply would be sitting there making me look like a putz, and it wouldn't help to show anything about Calton that people can't already see anyway.

You expressed dismay about the RfC on my talk. I think the RfC was moderately successful for an RfC -- yes, it devolved into a bunch of confused opinionated people all pretending to agree with each other while simultaneously saying that everyone should just shut up, but pretty much every RfC does that. It was moderately successful because most of those people mentioned somewhere that Calton is being a jerk.

So what good came of all this? I think Calton will at least think twice before the next time he flies off the handle -- not because he has a change of heart, but because I think he prefers to avoid hearing idealistic fools like me comment on his conduct. Just speculating.

Cheers, rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 11:37, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I think at this point, it's best you heed your own advise and tone down the rhetoric, Rspeer. Thx. El_C 11:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: The Wiki Puzzle Logo

Sure thing. I'm touched ( : You should just make sure that the image is tagged with Template:Copyright_by_Wikimedia. Paul Stansifer 04:35, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

User talk pages

Main article: Wikipedia:User page

There is no such thing as private messaging on a MediaWiki wiki. User talk pages are public, and their histories and prior content are publicly available. If you erroneously think of them as being private messages, you are likely to get into trouble down the road. Uncle G 11:04, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you so much for the random smiley award! I really appreciate... being appreciated. It made my day. Cheers! ... discospinster _talk 16:47, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Interwikis

These are interwikis; links to the article in Wikipedias in other languages that appear on the left side of the page. They are not categories. Maybe you know what interwiki links are and mistook them for categories anyway... I'm not sure. Grandmasterka 03:48, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Interwikimedia_link provides a helpful explanation on what they are. Hbdragon88 01:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem. I just thought it was kind of cold of Grandmaster to say "interwiki" links and not give any kind of link explaining what they were, so I found one and posted it here. Hbdragon88 05:01, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

You have speedily removed removed my prod tags, but not bothered to improve the article in question. Lovely! Salad Days 08:00, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Radio

No worries...as far as I know we only stepped on top of each other once. Bearcat 08:29, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Cold! Bearcat 09:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Removing AfD tags

Although you're allowed to remove PROD tags, which seems to be how your discussion with Salad Days started, AfD tags don't work the same way. You're not allowed to remove someone else's AfD tag. If you think it's a speedy keep, get a consensus on AfD to agree with you.

I think you should put the tags back, because now there are several orphaned AfD discussions as a result. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 11:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. I restored it back to the article; though, removed it soon thereafter once I closed it (and other related ones) as Speedy keep(s). Thx El_C 12:09, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh and I archived my talk page today — thanks again for the reminder. El_C 12:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Comments

Hi Orange,

I'll just chime in with everyone else when I ask that you not remove AFD tags. Read the tag before your knee-jerk reaction to remove it kicks in. :) As far as Calton goes, I strongly advise you (again!) to just avoid him. The English language Wikipedia has more than 1.6 million articles. Think about it: the chances of running across someone in a mansion with 1,600,000 rooms aren't very good, so it seems like it would be pretty easy to avoid each other.

I'll note Calton was blocked just a few weeks ago for edit warring. You yourself should have been blocked after your very first edits on Wikipedia, but I wanted to extend to you a little good faith, and you proved yourself. You've become an excellent editor, but follow the rules and keep your nose clean. Don't get into edit wars and don't make me regret my decision.

Best wishes and happy editing, Firsfron of Ronchester 08:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Orange,

The content of the article in September began with: "WRAJ Internet Radio is an internet radio station originating from the Long Island/New York region. The station plays popular adult contemporary music from the 70s, 80s, 90s, and today. WRAJ Internet Radio complies with the DMCA of 1998, and is licensed with ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC. The station's ratings are usually at the top when it comes to Long Island and New York internet radio stations."

The content of the "new" article began with: "WRAJ Internet Radio is an internet radio station originating from the Long Island/New York region. The station plays popular adult contemporary music from the 70s, 80s, 90s, and today. WRAJ Internet Radio complies with the DMCA of 1998, and is licensed with ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC. The station's ratings are usually at the top when it comes to Long Island and New York internet radio stations."

Under Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#General_criteria, G4, "A copy [...] of a page that was deleted via Articles for deletion or another XfD process, provided that the copy is substantially identical to the deleted version and that any revisions made clearly do not address the reasons for which the page was deleted." These two pages are substantially identical. I do not know what caused you to repost this deleted content, but the consensus was that it was not the right fit for Wikipedia. We all have articles we think should be saved, but Wikipedia is a collaborative effort.

As for your apology to WC, I did see that, and I was glad. I think you are a fine editor. But you must learn the policies and abide by them. Don't remove any tags unless the tag specifically says you can remove it. Don't repost deleted material, and don't become involved in edit wars. Firsfron of Ronchester 08:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

No personal attacks

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Metros232 11:19, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Anytime you start a paragraph with "I know I will get in trouble for this one," it's probably wise to follow that instinct, Metros232 11:27, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for placing me in the editors who rock category (hopefuly I'll remain there after this note!). I removed that section because it violates WP:USER, which, for our pruposes, basically says: 'you can list as many people that you like but you cannot list people you dislike whose conduct you feel is questionable, since it counts as an attack.' Hope that makes sense. Regards, El_C 11:41, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Revert

I apologize for the revert of your user page I just made! I was looking at something and dropped something on my laptop causing the mouse thing to click and it got reverted! This is why I need to not edit before breakfast anymore. Metros232 11:59, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Metro 232's Talk Page

No, I just made it up. I was originally going to vandalize some articles, but I decided to revert vandalism and be a jackass about it instead. Have a nice day... --JJ the Crusader 18:13, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry - I got your post

I saw where Calton was trying to hide his RfC problems by reverting you on his talk page, but I got your message; BTW, that 2nd link you provided me didn';t relate to Calton; I commented on the 1st one. What up with that 2nd link you gave me??--GordonWatts 18:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

PS: I did comment on Calton's RfC or whatever you wanna call it; Could you comment on: Talk:Government_involvement_in_the_Terri_Schiavo_case#Edit_War_between_me_and_Calton? Thx.--GordonWatts 18:28, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

RE:Help

I can't tell how it's vandalism; feel free to cite a few examples bellow. Thx. El_C 14:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't sweat it

I wasn't trying to be rude to anyone, that was just getting far off topic. I've never had a problem with Calton, but I can see how he could get under someone's skin, so to speak.--Isotope23 15:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Img49.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Img49.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 12:55, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:WkmmHeader.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:WkmmHeader.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 13:37, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Userbox

LOL! No prob. I didn't even notice right away either. It's a cool box though, as you can see, I'm still on this darn puter! (supposed to be working even, sheesh -- I got it bad) LOL!~ Cricket02 14:59, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Reply

It's not necessary to apologize for the actions of another user. I was involved and you notified me of an RfC. That was that. happy editing, i kan reed 01:30, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Calton's talk page

Hi, would you mind stopping the posts on Calton's talk page, unless you have something new and important that you want to say to him. It's beginning to look like just trying to hassle someone. When people don't get on well, it's better if they avoid each other. Just a friendly word of advice. Musical Linguist 02:03, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Calton

Okay, thanks for that. I'll have a read through it a bit later. Thanks, Sarah 07:26, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Cumberland/sup v. ref

Hi there. The easiest way is to add the link between ref tags. In example, <ref>[http://www.test.com/file]</ref> will generate ^[1], and add the link to the references section of the article. To show up, the article must have a <nowiki><references /> or {{reflist|1}}. To make links look better, you should also use {{cite web}} or {{cite book}}, which format the links in a better way. Here are some examples:

Paragraph

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.^[1] Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.^[2] Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.^[3] Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.^[3]

References

In the first case, I used the ref tag with a link inside, and as you can see, it does not look that good. The second uses the link inside the ref tag, with a name, just like an external link. The third case uses the {{cite web}} to format the link appropriately. Note also that I gave the reference a name with <ref name="wiki">, this way I can reuse the reference later (in example, as <ref name="wiki" />). This prevents having to type the same url or reference again and again, and allows users to learn how many times a reference is being used (note that the third reference has "a" and "b", which means the same reference is being used twice). If you need more help, just ask me, or check Wikipedia:Citing sources and m:Cite/Cite.php. Cheers! -- ReyBrujo 17:53, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

WPXI

A friend of mine found the FCC application online. I knew there was no ownership of the channels, but rather a marketing and news share agreement. Some others were adamant that it was co-owned. I also fixed the WPGH page. Thanks for the message!! --Write On 1983 03:10, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Butch

Er, I really don't think that Calton meant it to be read as 'bitch', and I think you may be overreacting. Was he being abrasive? Yes. Was he using a 'faux cuss' word? No. Calton generally says what's on his mind; I would expect him to say exactly what he meant, without prettification. It's an honest sort of rudeness. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

...and while I'm thinking of it, it's really not necessary to add a second warning in a second section on his talk page for a single incident. As a rule, piling on isn't helpful, and it is much more likely to put an editor on the defensive. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I second that. I've already asked you to stay away from Calton. You're just making matters worse. If Calton is behaving badly, he doesn't need a warning from you. In particular, he doesn't need a template-style warning. The way you're following him around and commenting on everything he does really is beginning to look like stalking. Could I ask you to just edit the encyclopaedia and forget about Calton unless he posts something to you or something about you. He has brought the matter to the community. He does not have a consensus for banning Gordon. Some people have already commented on his unpleasantness towards Gordon. If there's more of it, it will be noticed without your help. Like Gordon, and perhaps like Calton, you need to be able to let go and move on. Thanks. Musical Linguist 17:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Warning

I have asked you in the past to just leave user:Calton alone. I have broadly hinted that since Wikipedia has 1.6 million articles, there's simply no reason to cross paths with him over and over. Just leave him alone. Stop harassing him with unwanted talk page messages; stop communicating with him altogether. There is no reason for you to continue leaving messages for him. If you continue, you will be blocked. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)