Emerson7

Joined 7 March 2006
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by HagermanBot (talk | contribs) at 20:22, 21 March 2007 (63.166.13.195 didn't sign: "List of Billionaires edit"). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Latest comment: 18 years ago by 63.166.13.195 in topic List of Billionaires edit


Please leave me a message! I will reply on your talk page.


Redwoods

Hi Emerson - I'm assuming you mean at the list of US State Trees? If that's the one, it is because California has two state trees, Sequoia sempervirens and Sequoiadendron giganteum jointly, so plural is the correct tense to use in this instance. Hope this helps! - MPF 19:22, 29 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Ultrafark?

Why does this NEED to be disproven in an article, and where is the verifiable external reference for it in the first place? Neither was given, so out it went. --JohnDBuell 02:08, 11 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

If it is indeed a meme, along the lines of "Tinywar does not exist," (a quotation used by MUDders to refer to a MUD/chat client program that did/does in fact exist, but it became a running joke to deny it), then it should be presented as a recurring theme/meme, with proper referencing from the board (link to a post or two), and not just put in the description/introduction, which would confuse a reader not familiar with the joke. --JohnDBuell 03:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Plant stem

 
have a look on that petioles, they are the continuation of the leaves. Stem in botanical sense means that selforganising, evergrowing structure, which holds them only.

Hello! While you had wonderfull idea to add some pictures in to the article of plant stem, which can make it much more accessible and ilustrating to the readers, I would like to ask you if there was some specific intention in the adding the Rhubarb leaves? I would'nt ask you if I would be completely doubting about it, but this image does'nt fit to me over there. That implies, that those leaves have anything more in common with stem than that they are sticking on one. Shortly: it is IMHO missleading. On the other hand, the adding of asparagus was such a great idea (I fear that such idea woud'nt come over my mind) as they are a nice example of commercially used stems never, that in outcome I wonder if I did overlook anything in the case of rhubarb. Maybe the Asparagus stems would be nicer leading picture. What do you thing about it? Reo ON | +++ 12:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi Emerson, thanks a lot for your quick response :). But that is the case with rhubarb image, that the picture does'nt contein the factual plant stems. Those are petioles or you may call them leafstalks, but the stem is plant organ of diferent ontogenetical origin and of different physiological function for plant. Regrettably there is so little progres as regards the articles about plant anatomy in Wikipedia! Apparently, someone else had the same intent as me,  :) but he did'nt ask and insted .. I hope that you are not upset from this dissent. I think it would be nice job to find other great candidat than just the stems of Asparagus and place them in the head of the article. I will try. Have a nice time with Wikipedia! With regards Reo ON | +++ 18:05, 20 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Jane Alexander

In cleaning up the article, I inadvertently omitted the succession boxes you had added. It was an honest mistake I will rectify now. Sorry! (I am going to leave the infobox deleted. It contains nothing not found in the body of the article and merely adds clutter. Thanks!)SFTVLGUY2 13:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Compacting references on Saparmurat Niyazov

Why are you compacting the reference templates on this article? It makes it much more clear when editing the reference itself if the separate parameters to the template are on different lines. --Dgies 19:54, 22 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

it is not really my intent to compact. i was actually 'correcting' the ref data. i don't really have a preference either way (compacted/expanded) but i just thought it would be easier for some if the ref text was inline with text of the article, and expanded in lists. plus, i'm working with a template and it's faster to do them all the same, and fix the layout later since there are currently so many 'edits per minute'. --emerson7 | Talk 21:10, 22 December 2006 (UTC)Reply
OK, I did not notice that. I did notice that the template formatting was all compacted, which made it hard to read. --Dgies 21:30, 22 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Saddam RV

Sorry, I missed the previous reference to the video. Thought I had something new to contribute. I'm new and simply missed the video link. Sorry.

Jaskemr 21:43, 31 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Your revert was in order. I simply missed it. I try to be fair and cite sources. I simply missed this one. My fault. Perhaps a more prominent link to the video? Not sure. I missed it and read the section. Perhaps I'm not the only one. Anyways, no offense taken to the revert. My fault as stated above. Hope to work with you on future articles.

Jaskemr 23:53, 31 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Aaron Copland

Wow! Nice job! The article looks much cleaner and nicer! Thanks for your work on it! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 05:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Awesome! BTW, have you considered joining the LGBT WikiProject? Stop on by and take a look around, and if you're interested, sign up - we'd love to have your participation! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 06:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

El Rancho

The reason these were included is that are multiple hotel/motels and schools that have used this name. The ones with redlinks do not have articles so it is important to note this so that other users are not confused. If I am wrong and they really do have articles under a different name, that the entry should remain with a link to the correct name. That's the main reason for a redirect, alternate names or misspellings. Since this is a dab page, that principal still applies. Vegaswikian 19:00, 26 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Vladimir Horowitz

Nice job on the updates. Thanks for your help!THD3 02:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

I reverted your latest edit to Vladimir Horowitz. Your edit makes it sound as if Horowitz was under the influence after 1985. He was not. The medications were started in 1981 and discontinued in 1983.THD3 01:00, 17 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

You're right. The paragraph in question is in very poor condition. It has probably been edited to death. I will attempt a complete rewrite.THD3 16:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I have rewritten the paragraph. Do you have any ideas for a better photo at the top of the article? The 1985 picture now in use is God-awful.THD3 22:28, 17 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Anthony Clark

Why did you revert the changes I made to Anthony Clark's entry? There is no evidence he is gay or atleast that he has come out of the closet on any reputable website. This is akin to someone adding gay categories to Tom Cruise or Clay Aiken's entrys. And if you check, the person who added the gay categories to Anthony Clark's page was a known vandal who has since been blocked. I've removed the categories again, and if you have a problem with it, please discuss on Anthony's talk page. -CJ 21:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ok, all I wanted was a good reference for proof. Thanks! -CJ 22:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Fair use rationale for Image:L'OrdreDesArtsCommandeur.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:L'OrdreDesArtsCommandeur.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 lacking such an explanation 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:11, 11 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Edits fixed

I made some edits to 2 paragraphs and several dates Leonard Bernstein and you reverted them. I had a look to find out why, and realized that I had added brackets to a couple of unnecessary dates. I have restored the correct edits (but not the superfluous brackets). In future you might consider either (a) correcting only the errors without reverting the entire edit, or (b) informing the user who has made the mistake. Thanks —SaxTeacher (talk) 00:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Welcome to WikiProject LGBT studies!

 

Hi, Emerson7, welcome to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies!

We are a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to improving articles regarding lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, aromantic, asexual and agender people. LGBTQ+ studies covers people, culture, history, rights, and related subjects concerning sexual identity and gender identity - this covers a lot of ground and your help is appreciated!

  • Joining the discussion at WT:LGBTQ+ is a great way to get started.
  • At LGBTQ+/Collaboration, you can find a list of WP:LGBTQ+ participants and task groups.
  • Visit LGBTQ+/Editing for tools to help create, assess, and improve articles on LGBTQ+ topics.
  • LGBTQ+/Resources has style guides, external links, templates, and other tools that support researching and writing articles on LGBTQ+ topics.

-- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 07:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Relax...It'sJustSexDVD.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Relax...It'sJustSexDVD.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 15:29, 15 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

OMG, have you seen Relax, it's just sex? You're the only other person besides me that seems to have seen it! I loved that scene with Diego and Dwight where they're having sex to classical music and talking about what they're going to bring to the church barbecue. Brilliant. Sorry, I don't meet a lot of people who watch the films I watch. :) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 10:55, 16 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Jacqueline du Pre

Please stop correcting the Jacqueline du Pre page! It was I who made significant additions to the page a few months ago (albeit anonymously). At first I did make grammatical errors, but now they are in order. 'At the age of four' makes more sense for the flow of the article than 'at age four'.

And regarding the instrument, the 1673 should not be italicised, as it is not the name of the instrument. That is why I wrote 'an instrument made in 1673'.

I have done much research regarding du Pre, so please leave the page alone. Thank you very much

Ernest Emerson

I'll ask that you kindly leave comments on the article's talk page. Issues of notability have been met. Just because an article is about a man and his company does not make it advertising.

Article is rated as a Good article and is undergoing review as a Featured Article Candidate.

Thank You. --Mike Searson 04:25, 17 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the excellent updates and new block on the San Francisco Gay Men's Chorus article. It seems you have culled some facts from the SFGMC website (and from GMCLA's website as Bruce Mayhall is their conductor, not SFGMC's). SFGMC's website is out-of-date, hence my revisions. FYI, SFGMC's new website will be launched in March. Thanks again, MusicMen 01:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I would be grateful if you would clarify the tag you added today. You tagged the article for "external links clean up". Each of the eight referenced links in the article relate specifically to the content, so I'm confused about the reason for the tag. However, if the tag is related to the "References" list at the end of the article (which are not linked to the article), that would make sense. I will remove many of these as they relate to content that has since been deleted from the article. MusicMen 19:24, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


you left me a note about images, which i don't fully understand. sorry if i'm being daft, but could please explain further? thanks for your help. MusicMen 05:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thanks for your response, advice and encouragement :-) MusicMen 00:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Saw your note about too many links, so now I'm confused. I thought you suggested that the list of references should be incorporated into the article as relevant links, which is what I have done. Are you saying that I've provided too much evidence of fact? MusicMen 23:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I see you're editing currently, so I'll leave it alone for a while. If you delete references, could you please save them somewhere? I don't necessarily have all of these listed elsewhere. Thanks. MusicMen 00:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I have submitted the article for Jump-a-Class. Perhaps ambitious, but seeing as I've done so much work in such a short time (since the B-Class rating was issued), I thought I'd give it a shot. I'm in the process of collecting old newspaper archives to further reference some of the factual information and I plan to incorporate the remaining few dangling references. Do you have any suggestions for what else I might do? Thanks. MusicMen 22:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Bandini (1963 film) / Bandini (film 1963)

Hi. I didn't do the copy and paste move. I saw two identical pages and I took the one with the improper name and redirected it to the properly named article. I didn't check the history in the process since I wasn't deleting either page. If you think it's more proper you can request that that Bandini (1963 film) be deleted and then Bandini (film 1963) be moved to its title. gren グレン 00:17, 21 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Better Source Request for Image:EstherRolle.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:EstherRolle.gif. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source ___domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talkpage. Thank you. —Angr 23:13, 21 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for uploading Image:EstherRolle.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. —Angr 23:13, 21 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Gay News

Hi,

I see you reverted my edit to this article. I can't say I'm particularly bothered either way whether "GB£" is blue-inked or not. I just feel it was unnecessary. In my view it's not necessary to have any in depth knowledge of the currency in question to understand the Gay News article.

I'm assuming that pound sterling is a sufficiently well known currency to allow the reader to understand the article without having to research the currency further.

Anyway as I said I'm not particularly bothered either way in this case so I'm happy to leave it as it is.

Jules1975 10:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Cher Infobox formatting

I have a few discrepencied with your reversion of my edits to the infobox in the Cher article.

  • Sonny Bono should not be included as a past member, since that field is for groups only.
  • Vocalist is an occupation or role, not an instrument, whereas vocals is cited as a singer's instrument on albums.
  • The list of occupations and genres are not sentences which means the first member of the list should have the same capitalization as the following members, not capitalize the first member and lowercase the following. Also, the lists should be organized by level of significance or notability, not alphabetically.

Please let me know your thoughts on the above formatting issues. - cgilbert(talk|contribs) 06:44, 23 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

thanks for taking the time to leave a note...it's rarely done, and i admit i should do it more often. that said...the parameters have already been lain for this infobox, i couldn't disagree with you more on your interpretation.
  • Sonny and Cher were indeed a group. in fact there were others with them, particularly in the earlier days. When they broke up, they both continued their music careers...one of 'em was a lot more successful as it turns out.
  • whereas the the term vocalist might not be the best descriptor, the template gives guidelines on what should go there. based on the guidelines, the voice is the instrument, which sorta makes sense once you think about it.
  • though not proper sentence, it is non-the-less a sentence, as well as a list. guidelines for lists require that they be alphabetical or chronological. anything with regard to significance or notability is wildly subjective and therefore not appropriate per WP:NPOV.
take a peek at Template:Infobox musical artist. the article there gives guidance and examples of formatting. cheers. --emerson7 | Talk 08:06, 23 February 2007 (UTC)Reply


Thank you for your take on the formatting. I did find that the Mariah Carey example listed her occupations with the first capitalized and the rest lowercase, however, notice that singer is listed before record producer, which is listed before actress. I also know that Sonny and Cher were a group, and the Sonny and Cher article lists both Sonny and Cher as former members. Cher, however, is not a group, and it is not proper to say that Sonny was a former member of Cher. His musical association with Cher was limited to the Sonny and Cher group, which is the only place where his former membership should be included. On Neil Young's article, you don't see Stephen Stills listed as a former member, even though the two had a duo at one point. - cgilbert(talk|contribs) 16:20, 23 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Your Hyphen on Lily Tomlin's page

Well, if "it's not a typo" as you say, then it's simply improper punctuation. There is no reason to have a trailing, dangling hyphen after the word "Tony" in that sentence as you wrote it:

"Tony- and Emmy Award-winning"

"Tony Award" would not have a hyphen in between the words, if not separated by "and Emmy Award". The hyphen is properly used here: "Award-winning". Think about it again. Find another example or your usage to back it up, if you still think that's proper.--MrEguy | ♠♥♣♦ 20:44, 24 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

At the risk of be overly pedantic, hyphens are joiners that link words to avoid ambiguity or to form a single idea from two or more words. When actually, broken down, the sentence should properly read: "Tony Award-winning, and Emmy Award-winning..." I think we both agree what an awkward sentence that makes. So...we omit words to make a better flow. The hyphen behind "Tony" links it to "Award", hence we 'should' have something akin to "Tony- and Emmy-Award..." showing that Tony and Emmy are being linked with Award.

You are correct, "Tony- and Emmy Award-winning..." is indeed incorrect. The correct phrase should read: "Tony- and Emmy-Award-winning..." --emerson7 | Talk 23:53, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I do realize this is not a terribly big deal. Just for clarity's sake: What you described in the last sentence above is not what I was meaning. Here's what I believe to be correct usage:

1.) Tony and Emmy Award-winning. 2.) Tony and Emmy Award winning.

Here's what I believe to be incorrect usage: 1.) Tony- and Emmy-Award winning. 2.) Tony- and Emmy-Award-winning.

The only place a hyphen is properly used in this instance is between Award and winning, thusly, Award-winning and it's optional. Maybe someone else could offer their opinion. This is making me dizzy :)--MrEguy | ♠♥♣♦ 02:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

oddly enough i didnt even do that, and someone actually hacked into my account, i am changing my pw.. sorry for the inconvience..

With respect, i submit 1.) Tony and Emmy Award-winning. 2.) Tony and Emmy Award winning. are wrong on both accounts. 'How wrong' is but a trifling matter. For reference, check out google for 'suspensive hypenation.' --emerson7 | Talk 19:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Can you show me other examples of your usage? I found none on Wikipedia. Here are a few examples I found to support my viewpoint.

See Cynthia Nixon's page Tony and Emmy Award-winning
and Tony Walton's page Tony and Emmy-winning
again here Deaths in July 2006 Tony and Emmy Award-winning

No hyphens are used here.
Shenandoah Apple Blossom Festival - Tony and Emmy Award winning
Hamilton Philharmonic Orchestra - Tony and Emmy Award winning
Pacific Palisades, Los Angeles, California - Tony and Emmy Award winning

Other examples.
List of Poles - Oscar and Emmy Award winning
List of University of California, Los Angeles people - Oscar and Emmy Award winning
Paul Jabara - Oscar and Grammy Award-winning
--MrEguy | ♠♥♣♦ 21:57, 26 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I just happened upon this discussion, but I agree with emerson7. The hyphen in award-winning isn't optional, and the phrase should be "Tony- and Emmy-Award-winning". And what's used in Wikipedia articles most often probably isn't the best source for what is right grammatically. :) --Galaxiaad 06:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Spencer Tracy

I researched and put the academy award nominations neatly into the infobox, but you deleted it. I was just wondering why, since it is seen in that format on other actors' pages. Supertigerman 01:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

LGBT WikiProject newsletter

Request for clarification on linkage...

Could you clarify your justification for removing links on the "Emerson (surname)" disambiguation page? Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ulmanor (talkcontribs) 05:55, 1 March 2007 (UTC).Reply

Image tagging for Image:IBDB.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:IBDB.PNG. 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. 21:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Dear Sir,

Was the problem with my edit to the Star Trek page that I didn't cite my text?

If I cite the text next time will it be ok?

Yours sincerely,

Carrotcheese.

John Cage

In response to the following from my talk page:

i know what you mean by changing the place of birth, but i don't believe your interpretation of Template:Infobox_musical_artist#Fields is correct. i think we need to get solid clarification on exactly what the origin field is to represent. --emerson7 | Talk 22:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'm just following the format as per the field notes and the sample of Mariah Carey. I would be in favor though of having more input from somebody with more experience from WP:Musicians. Maybe Heaven's Wrath can help us out. - cgilbert(talk|contribs) 22:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ira Glass

I understand why you reverted my placing of the city into the date of birth sentence, because although it is widespread in usage, the Manual of Style shows that the correct format is just the date. But is there a particular reason you're being really gung-ho about reverting "born" back to "b."? "Born" is more grammatically appropriate. NickBurns 06:09, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Actor infoboxes in general

Is the silver color used for dead people, and the yellow for living? Supertigerman 01:09, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

List of billionaires (2006)

Reason stated in the change description. --wil osb 02:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Again reason stated in why the revert, you wanna revert, fine, at least get the facts correct for Bill Gates and Warren Buffet's net worth. --wil osb 06:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

unbelievable

Please do not write specific criticisms of my editing on my talk page, it is shallow and pedantic Pags182 04:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

the text is not mine...it is transcluded from template. --emerson7 | Talk 05:17, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Re. List of billionaires (2006)

Sorry, when protecting articles, admins will lock on the current version, not on the "right" or "wrong" version. Choosing a version where to lock is to directly involve in the dispute and admins who do this may not protect the article afterwards according to the protection policy. Protection does not endorse the current version of the article though. Now it's time to try to reach a consensus with the other users involved in the dispute, by requesting them to join a civil discussion on the talk page. Once an agreement has been made, the article shall be unprotected. If the other party refuses to talk, then it's legitimate to unprotect and revert to a previous version. Regards, Húsönd 18:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Heh, it was a typical response but not a canned response. I did notice the vandalism, but since the edit war was there, I had to upgrade to full protection.--Húsönd 18:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
Oh well, if the war is over I'll just downgrade to semi-protection. Easy. :-) --Húsönd 18:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Very biased editting, disappointing

who jackbooted the Raymond Burr content, Goebbels? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.225.183.159 (talk) 15:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC).Reply

As much as it may annoy you, Carlos Slim Helu is Lebanese and frequents his native country every few months. Refrain from vandalizing the page if you will.Emбargo 20:39, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Summer of My German Soldier (Television film)

To answer your first question, page names generally should avoid abbreviations. As for citing sources for a movie synopsis, everything should be cited if possible. Pyrospirit Flames Fire 23:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps it should be moved to Summer of My German Soldier (TV film)? Also, if you think it has enough sources, go ahead and remove the tag. Pyrospirit Flames Fire 00:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Pee Wee Herman

Wikipedia:Lead section states:

"The lead should be capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article, establishing context...and briefly describing its notable controversies"

That is why I am adding that part. The lead in this article also needs more info on his general career which I will add later today. I am just trying to improve this articles lead section.Hoponpop69 23:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

--202.164.195.56 01:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

queen latifah

hey, your reversion to my queen latifah edits might have been wrong. i was not vandalising the page at all. it needs sources.

cheers --202.164.195.56 01:46, 13 March 2007 (UTC)mikeReply

Dispute on JonBenet Ramsey's article

Before reverting again, read the talk page for what I wrote. 1ne 05:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

License tagging for Image:Quirks&Quarks2.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Quirks&Quarks2.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:09, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

AYBS? characters

I'm not quite sure why you reverted my revert. Mrs. Slocombe always said "My" not "Me", and I cannot understand you reason for revert my edit to clarify that? --Berks105 20:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'd disagree on "often", but regardless she usually says "My" and thats what is important. --Berks105 20:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
If she did use it regulary (I don't think once is enough, but nevermind) then it would be best to insert both "My pussy" and "Me pussy".--Berks105 20:32, 15 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Jean Harlow - unsourced claim

Hi. I'm new to Wikipedia, and just getting a feel for how things work, but I don't understand why you reverted a change I made to the Jean Harlow article.

My change was to improve (I think!) the readability of a sentence: It had the awkward construction "when she began to attend school, ... she did not learn until then" ("when" and "until then" serve the same purpose) and unnecessary phrases "a private school" (with a name like Miss Barstow's Finishing School for Girls, it'd have to be) and "with other children" (well, it's a finishing school for girls, so of course).

You reverted this change, calling it an unsourced claim, but it's exactly the same claim that was there before (except, I guess, that it doesn't explicitly claim the school is private and had multiple students). Should it be flagged as "citation needed?"

I apologize if the nature of my change wasn't clear--I know I forgot to include an edit summary.

Thanks --Eostrom 18:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Vandalism

I saw that you had warned the person at the following IP about vandalism recently, and I just wanted to let you know that it's happened again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:130.194.13.103 Tonight, he vandalized the following page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lasvegas.terra.1500pix.jpg Just letting you know. Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.157.47.150 (talk) 01:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC).Reply

Vallejo, CA revision

Can you please explain what I did wrong in my revision to the Vallejo article? I want to learn better what is or is not allowed. Thank you.

Brad (EntirelyBS).

Vallejo, CA - edits

ok, understood. but instead of simply removing the section (reverting), can the links simply be taken out of the new content? Or is it now for me to do as my next step (putting them back in but without the links). Thanks, Brad. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Entirelybs (talkcontribs) 16:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC).Reply

Seattle Men's Chorus article - where is it?

I added a link to the Seattle Men's Chorus on an article, and it came up red and didn't connect. I can only get to the SMC page now via cached links. Has the article been deleted? MusicMen 16:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

are you arguing the validity of the change I made? or the change itself?

please clarify - what change? MusicMen 01:06, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

George Szell - flags

Could you please respond to my question on "Talk:George Szell" re use of flag icons? couldn't find the policy you referred to in the edit summary. thanks muchMjplant 16:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

List of Billionaires edit

Hello, Thank you for your concern in following my actions on the list of billionaires edit. The only reason I entered in blank text to the page was that someone had put "your mom..." as one of one of the worlds top billionaires. I merely removed it. No vandalism intended. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.166.13.195 (talk) 20:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC).Reply