Kjkolb
Welcome to my talk page. Please feel free to leave me a message. If I have upset or offended you, it was probably unintentional. I usually go out of my way to be nice, but electronic communication can make one's intentions seem hostile, even when they aren't. Also, if I have violated a policy, it was probably unintentional as well, as I'm still learning. Just let me know so I can do better in the future. Thanks
Welcome!
Hi Kjkolb! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing!
Great additions to the Wikipedia, Kjkolb! --FCYTravis 07:24, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Wikification
Great job you are doing on wikification. Just to say, in my view wikification includes putting an article in at least one category - even if it is only a stub category. -- RHaworth 08:18:44, 2005-08-29 (UTC)
- I'll look into categorization. Thanks -- Kjkolb 08:20, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
Good catch, but I only saw it because I decided to look again at my contributions from the previous few days. Next time, how about using {{deleteagain}}? --cesarb 16:49, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks, I didn't know about that tag. -- Kjkolb 02:18, September 4, 2005 (UTC)
Liquify, wikify
Thanks for the note; I just completed the process, changing the initial tag from VfD to AfD. Ciao. paul klenk 11:43, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
When removing tags like this one, please make sure that you've completed the work. For example, the subject's name needs to be bolded, and wikilinks should be checked and corrected. Other stylistic matters are also best dealt with (such as italicising film titles). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 08:54, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
- I will consider your comments. However, it was not my intention to completely cleanup the article. It had wikify and cleanup tags and I was only doing the wikifying. I did miss at least one of the links, though. Thanks, -- Kjkolb 09:19, September 10, 2005 (UTC)
- The bolding of the subject in the first sentence (or two) is one of the more important points, though (see also Point Four Program). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:05, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
- Usually, I do bold the subject (Company limited by guarantee, for example). I don't know why I didn't this time. I'll check the program too. Thanks, -- Kjkolb 11:11, September 10, 2005 (UTC)
- Are there any other conventions you think I should know about? I've never even known if the subject was supposed to be bolded. I just saw it on most articles and guessed that it was. Also some are merely italicized or bolded and italicized, is that improper? -- Kjkolb 11:28, September 10, 2005 (UTC)
I realize that there were strong feelings on both sides with respect to the outcome of the AfD for this article, now located at Alternative theories regarding Hurricane Katrina. I would like to assure those who expressed concerns about the content, tone, and potential for degradation of this article that I intend for it to continue to exist only as long as is necessary to draw the contributions of fringe theorists away from the more substantial Hurricane Katrina articles. Once interest in this topic dies down, I'll quietly trim and merge this information into the appropriate general-topic articles. In the interim, I will carefully watch this page to prevent it from being abused, and I will continue to work towards making this article NPOV, properly sourced, and useful to those seeking an accurate record of the hysterics that so often follows catastrophe. Cheers. -- BDAbramson talk 00:55, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
Metalworking WikiProject
I notice you making a number of changes to metalworking articles, and was wondering if you wanted to join the wikiproject? Help merging duplicates and other cleanup is always needed! Bushytails 23:53, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks, although I'm not an expert on metalworking. However, if I find something within my ability, I'll try to fix it. I renamed an article to follow naming conventions and then changed some links to make them direct to the article. Later, I found that abrasive waterjet cutter and Water Jet Cutter were duplicates, so I put merge tags on them, then I went ahead and merged them myself. Of course, then I had to change the links again. :-) -- Kjkolb 02:05, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Heh, that's been on the to-do list for a while... right now we're working more on categorizing, sorting, etc, then will work on intro pages, etc,... then we'll get around to fixing up articles. :) Bushytails 03:08, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
Henry H. Spalding
Thanks for your comments on the talk page. Eventually, I'll find time to deal with the letter in a little more systematic basis. But..............did you intend to remove the wikify tag? It's still there. Best wishes. WBardwin 06:50, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
- Dang, I guess I did it too. It's gone now. :-) -- Kjkolb 06:52, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
Social Technology
Dear friend,
“Social Technology” is my first article at Wikipedia. I am new to this world of web publishing. Please pardon me for any errors that I have made and may make due to my ignorance of the norms and rules of the Wikipedia community.
This summer some good ideas occurred to me and I put them down in this article. In the article, I defined the term “Social Technology” and some basic areas to think and work upon.
Then I heard about Wikipedia where any one can contribute and enhance an article. I felt that this was a great place for ideas. I thought that many more ideas would come in and the article would be enhanced.
I posted it from my web log http://neeray.blogspot.com to this site. Unfortunately I forgot to post the copy right notice and a very vigilant member noticed the same article on my web log and marked it for copyright violation. I am very happy that people here are very vigilant. I have now posted the copy right message under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 on the “Social Technology temporary page” and in the article on my web log too.
Then I worked a little on the temporary page and find that now this is marked for deletion for “Rambling”. These are tiny seedlings of ideas. Please do not delete them even before they are seen and flower into something better. Please advise me as to what should I do to improve this article.
I have great faith in the collective wisdom of the people. That is what this article is about. Please do whatever is right according to the rules and norms of the community.
I tried posting this at the Articles for Deletion page but it is not showing there. Please tell me what to do.
Best regards, Nirupma Kapoor
neeray 06:14, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
Bill Rosendahl
Thanks KJ. However, when I said I was looking for help with Wikifying, I was requesting that somebody summarize the text from the official biography. In other words, to take it and break it down into non-copyright ideas. 198.65.167.213 00:43, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
Brookie here
Thanks for the note - the more turgid articles are quite ofter the copyvios - will try and spot them better! :) ...en passant! 06:46, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
The problem is that there's no introduction, no explanation or summary. When I scrolled down I found "Back to main article for New York City", but that's not really appropriate for a Wikipedia article, and anyway doesn't give much information. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:18, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
FYI because you have put a copyvio tag there. The title is incorrect. I am moving it (with tag and all) to Sarfraz Nawaz. Tintin 22:07, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Thank you
Thanks for fixing the blunder I made on my userpage. I thought it was just a link, I had no idea it was actually putting it in the category. Thanks! - Saikiri 04:06, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
You may want to revisit Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bornscar. I was unable to confirm existance of this band, or their hit. Friday (talk) 19:41, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Just letting you know
You nominated the article Mike Sajecki for deletion. It appears that the user may have removed your AfD tag. AfD: Mike SajeckiCpaliga 03:14, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks, Cpaliga. I changed it back, but I'm not too concerned about it. Removing the tag on the article doesn't take it off the AfD page and the closing admin should be able to figure it out. I put the article on my watch list in case it's changed again. -- Kjkolb 03:27, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Notability deletions
I noticed that you nominated both Strategic negotiations and Turnip head for deletion on the grounds of notability. I point out that Wikipedia:Deletion policy has nothing about notability, and that an attempt to add notability as a deletion criteria failed to generate consensus. Furthermore, I point out that the deletion policy specifically states that articles that are "Such a minor branch of a subject that it doesn't deserve an article" should be merged, not deleted.
In light of this, I ask you to reconsider your practice of making nominations on these grounds - instead consider the verifiability, vanity, and dicdef policies, which I think can be used to delete about 90% of the crap that gets nominated for deletion. Snowspinner 15:27, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
- Notability was mentioned 287 times on the October 4, 2005 articles for deletion page, counting all forms of the word. Also, there are certainly things that are verifiable, not vanity and not dictionary definitions that cannot be merged. For example, a well written article on a small Los Angeles apartment building. Where would that be merged? I'm really asking, not being sarcastic. -- Kjkolb 03:46, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Other users, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Snowspinner 2. -- Kjkolb 06:51, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
WP:CP
Hi, you've reported copyright infringements to WP:CP in the last week, a new measure was recently passed to allow the speedy deltion of new pages that are cut and paste copyvios. Please follow these instructions if you come across this type of copyvio. Thanks. --nixie 00:16, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
| Blatant copyright infringements may now be "speedied"
If an article and all its revisions are unquestionably copied from the website of a commercial content provider and there is no assertion of permission, ownership or fair use and none seems likely, and the article is less than 48 hours old, it may be speedily deleted. See CSD A8 for full conditions. After notifying the uploading editor by using wording similar to:
Blank the page and replace the text with
to the article in question, leaving the content visible. An administrator will examine the article and decide whether to speedily delete it or not. |
Thanks for your tireless wikification
I have been applying the wikify tag to numerous articles (save those I wikified myself) and it seems most of those that are wikified by someone, are wikified by you. This barnstar is my expression of gratitude. Please keep up the good work. - BorgQueen 17:48, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks. :-) -- Kjkolb 06:01, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Article on cyberbullying
- I have further expanded the current stub and outlined a plan for expansion on the talk page. I would be grateful if you could have a look. Capitalistroadster 10:45, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- That looks fine. -- Kjkolb 10:50, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Wikify tag
fixes done. Sorry about that. DES (talk) 14:31, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks! -- Kjkolb 02:42, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
Wikification
I understand what you are talking about, i recongnize the fact that the article is poorly written but i'm very busy these last few days. I will personalize it the following days when i got much more available extra-time. Regards. Whlee 10:23, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
Please see whether the current cleanup would be sufficient for you to withdraw the delete vote. Thanks, Tintin 01:22, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
- Much better, good work, Tintin. -- Kjkolb 07:54, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
John Owen (bishop)
Hi Kjkolb, you did a pretty good job at linking this article, and I wonder why User:63.204.105.220 put the {wikify} tag on. He's not even a registered member. The "best" part is that he did nothing to the article, except to tag it. Why can't he contribute his part, since the job is almost perfect?
Honestly, I sometimes get cheesed off, as there are still a lot of totally unwikified articles in Wikipedia. Why must anyone expect 100% perfection, when there are so many that are not even 50%? In any case, I have put up a short introductory paragraph, and did some tidying. If this guy still put the tag up, he must be a vandalist. — PM Poon 01:52, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, some people want to link the articles to death and others don't know what "wikify" means. Sometimes an article can look under-linked, but it actually has the important words linked and more would mean making duplicates or meaningless links. He/she probably just misunderstood. If it has the important terms linked, basic formatting, like a bolded subject and properly made lists, and is in one or more appropriate categories, I just remove the tag and say why on the edit summary or on the talk page. Thanks -- Kjkolb 09:13, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
electric bicycle
see my comments on my personal wiki page [1] --CyclePat 23:02, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
Salahuddin Ayyubi
The copyright violation cited for article Salahuddin Ayyubi is irrelevant, regardless of the page's previous content, as the page itself was redundant and should have redirected to the Wikipedia article on Saladin. Can you agree that the matter can be resolved by simply forwarding the page to the much more comprehensive and complete article already listed, considering it's simply a spelling variation of the same person's name? - Reason. 12 October 2005
- Yes, but I don't think you need my permission for this. Once it's redirected, it should be removed from the Wikipedia:Copyright problems page. Thanks -- Kjkolb 10:16, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
C. C. Rousseau
Thanks for attributing. My pen must have dried up. Dlyons493 Talk 15:03, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
New TV and radio station guidelines
In general I really like what you've come up with here, and I thank you for your effort, but I do take some issue with the guidelines on class C and D stations. I do have a harder time explaining what they don't include that I miss, though. I basically think all public university radio stations should be included. As for private ones, well, I think there should be some specific guidelines. Full disclosure: I have created WCWS and WNZR. I have no problem with WNZR going. I do have a problem with WCWS going, even suspending the slight conflict of interest I have from going to school where that radio station is -- but I'm not sure how to explain its notability. Is it because WCWS and WQKT are the only two radio stations in Wooster, a relatively large and quickly-growing market for the area, and that WCWS is still holding its own in the ratings despite the fact that WQKT is owned by Clear Channel and has money hemoraging out of its orifices? Is it because WCWS is the only exposure that most people around here get to things like world music, the Metropolitan Opera, old radio plays, etc? I don't know. Maybe it's something else. (Tell me if/why you're bored with my explanation of WCWS and why you don't think it belongs, if you don't, so I can understand.)
I also think that there will be the occasional undergroud, unlicensed station that will be so notorious, whether it be for extreme views, or how long it went before the gov't shut it down and so it gathered a huge fanbase, or whatever, that Wikipedia should cover it. I think we should allow for that, but of course an article on every unlicenced radio station would be quite absurd! I think it this case, degree of news coverage and verifiability will be important things to consider. --Jacquelyn Marie 13:41, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
List of NHL Draft Busts
Hello Kjkolb. Thank you for voting on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of NHL draft busts but I am asking really nicely for you to reconsider. There is already a precedent of this sort of list on wikipedia. For example, if these article were put of for deletion, would you vote keep or delete?
- List of commercial failures, List of flops in entertainment, List of military disasters, List of political flops, List of famous failures in science and engineering, and List of commercial failures in computer and video gaming.
I don't see the difference between List of NHL Draft Busts and those articles. The NHL list just needs a stronger criteria set and it would be a great list. Thank you. Masterhatch 03:03, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
An article for deletion discussion in which you participated has been re-opened. You may want to participate in the discussions at VfU:Albert_M._Wolters or discuss at
Tony_Sidaway:talk how you feel about his actions.
Sorry for the spam,
brenneman(t)(c) 03:23, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- No problem. I left a comment on the new page. Thanks -- Kjkolb 11:21, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
You tagged 0DFx for speedy delete as a blatent copyvio. But WP:CSD A8 is availabe only for copyvios form a commercial content provider. This restriction was for cased much like this one -- this page was quite possibly uploded by soemone who wriote the web page, and if not, it is not unlikly that the copyright holder would be only too glad to release. This should either go throuygh the normal WP:CP process, or AfD, IMO. I plan to list it on AfD. DES (talk) 18:07, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- I understand your point. i have rasied the matter again on CSD talk, and on the Village Pump (policy), and altered the CP header to point this out. Until this has an effect i will go on removing invalid tags and notifing users. Note that even those who want to broaden the CSD to "commercial web pages" didn't generally support this when the source is soemone's personal page, as this case was, according to the URL. Thanks for respondign to me promptly. DES (talk) 18:59, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
I see you've got one already but I don't think another one will hurt :)
|
|
I give this barnstar to Kjkolb for his swift and tireless work on wikification - Haukur Þorgeirsson.
|
- Wow! Thanks! -- Kjkolb 19:50, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
a heads-up on the List of Guantanamo Bay detainees
Greetings,
Since you voted to keep the article List of Guantanamo Bay detainees I thought I would give you a "heads-up". A copyright violation was filed against the article, on October 11th. It was filed by someone who had voted to delete the article on October 5th.
I believe that the copyright violation is entirely bogus. I believe it is bogus because, as explained in Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service, lists of facts, like lists of names, cannot be copyright. This Feist v. Rural case went all the way to the US Supreme Court, which made the possibly counter-intuitive ruling that the amount of effort someone put in to compiling a list plays no role in determining whether that list is eligible for copyright protection.
Even if alphabetic lists of names could be copyright, I believe the wikipedia list would not be violating copyright since the list was compiled from various sources.
Yes, I have considered that this user invoked a bogus copyright violation to achieve a result that failed in the {AfD}. Yes, I asked them to terminate the copyright violation process, in light of Feist v Rural. They declined. The backlog in the administrators dealing with copyright violations seems to be on the order of a month long.
Anyhow, I wanted the people who had shown interest in the article to not freak out, or feel betrayed, by seeing the copyright violation tag. -- Geo Swan 11:30, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
Hi Kjkolb, I see you recently moved the above article to Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant. I moved it back because even though DCPP is indeed a nuclear plant, the correct name of the plant is actually "Diablo Canyon Power Plant". See here for example. HGB 01:16, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
- Hi again, thanks for your response. I was amazed that there are so many google hits on the plant with "nuclear" in it. I think most of them are more descriptive: a shortened version of the plant name "Diablo Canyon" followed by (lower case) "nuclear power plant". The official name though is definitely Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP), and the reason I'm certain is because I've worked there myself as a contractor on and off over the past decade and a half. But you're right that there definitely needs to be a redirect. I see even some official bodies like the NRC sometimes refer to the plant as DCNPP, which I find interesting. HGB 07:36, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Expand tag
The expand tag is actually a talk page template, and is listed as such at Wikipedia:Template messages/Talk namespace. Some people disagree with this, and other erroneously place it in the actual article, but most agree it belongs on the talk page. - SimonP 18:54, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
- In the past there has been a fair bit of discussion over this issue. You might be interested in Wikipedia:Template locations and its talk page, which was has a vote and a debate over this issue. - SimonP 19:33, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
I added a bit to it. Great idea, btw. I am an admin so I close quite a few afd votes. So anything that can cut the # of afd votes is a good idea in my book. :) Can you imagine if we had lists for every station's top x of x? Good god. As I said in what I added, some of these stations make up these countdowns or they don't give sources. If it's American Top 40 or something, that's different because they use sources you can look up (AT40 uses Radio and Records, which you can look up right online) and verify. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 03:54, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- I also wish we could do something to easily get rid of obvious hoaxes, like Ashlynne Boyd, which I just put for a vote. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 03:57, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- That would help and thanks for the input on the radio stations. -- Kjkolb 03:59, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
Hi!
Would you please revisit this debate and reconsider your vote? I think my comments and updates to the article (including her CV on the AFD) warrant a new look. She's not just a radio presenter but also a tv presenter on several TV channels. - Mgm|(talk) 19:24, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Done. -- Kjkolb 04:18, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
Hindu
Hi Kjkolb, I have noticed your discussion on above. IMHO, lot of anon IPs are making accretions to many an article. One of them claims to be Nirav.maurya but refuses to sign his posts. This IP starting with the series 70.X.X.X has been making POV and Original Research accretions to articles such as Indian nationalism, Hindu nationalism, Hindutva, Gandhism etc. - While most of these may not be harmful in terms of views espoused, they are definitely POV and against the policies of Wikipedia. I have tried to sanitise some of the edits but my edits on other pages are being attacked systematically. I have been waging a lone battle now-a-days but I thought that I shd let you know, just in case. --Gurubrahma 06:40, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
Making AfDs easier
I recently created a script that helps voting on AFDs, the afd helper. It's recently been extended to make the nomination process much quicker too, but this hasn't been tested yet. It looked like you might find it handy. Any feedback would be appreciated. jnothman talk 14:39, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
Bob Davidson
Hi I posted the original Bob Davidson article that I think you put up the "copyright notice". I am new here and don't know how to use all the features that is why I am contacting you. I hope you are the correct person to contact. I didn't realize this was copyrighted. I got this description from a friend who I thought wrote this but I realized, the almost exact article is on another website. My friend could be the one that wrote the original, I am not sure about that at this time. Anyways to be on he safe side, I personely wrote another article about Bob Davidson that is now in the TEMP. page. I am requesting that the original page and the copyright notice taken down and replaced with my new article.
- I let them know about the new article on the copyright problems page, but it make take a few days because of the backlog. The temporary page will be moved to the current article's page. It can't be copied and pasted because the history needs to be preserved. Thanks and good work, Kjkolb 17:49, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
- The move is done. --HappyCamper 03:37, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks, HappyCamper. -- Kjkolb 03:38, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
Actually
No, I just accidentally closed that discussion. I am actually doing relisting ok. You mentioned that it is "closed when the afd is finished". Well, someone closes them. :) It's not automatic. The relistings come about when someone goes to close the discussions and notices that one of the debates does not have enough votes. That's how this one came about. So I appreciate the help, but it was just me making a mistake. Thanks. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 11:25, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
- Ah ok. Gotcha. I'll double check. They really should make an easier way to relist articles, since with the high # of articles to vote on, it's happening more and more. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 11:43, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
- Yep, I had 2. One was a case where I just had it linked to the wrong place on the afd page. Thanks again. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 11:48, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
About the ConCarolinas Article
The "possible copyright violation" page has been up for over a week now. Is it supposed to be deleted automatically? I've written a new, shorter version with better hyperlinks that I would like to replace the old (questionable) Article. This new version is located at ConCarolinas/temp. I'm not sure how to (or if I'm allowed to) remove the "possible copyright violation" page and promote the temp article to become the primary. Please, either let me know that it's Okay for me to do this or, if you will, do this this switch for me. Thank you. Vorticity 19:38, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
Nearing resolution on the ConCarolinas Article
Kevin, I've copied the temp article into the primary ___location, as you suggested. Please request deletion of the temp sub-article at your convientience. I will add detail to the main article from time to time (and may create other articles about other SF conventions I've enjoyed) but I will try to avoid anything that smacks of copyright violation. I appreaciate your guidance and patience in helping me resolve this problem. Vorticity 19:05, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Scalar Gravity
Hi, Kjkolb, I think you misunderstood the nature of my objection to that article. If you have a moment, can you read my reply to your vote in the AfD and consider changing your vote? TIA ---CH (talk) 02:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Hi again, thanks for your reply. I think it is best to delete the current version since there is nothing to build on and anyone writing a new article on the topic of scalar theories of gravitation would have to begin by blanking this one anyway, so I hope you will change your vote. But see User:Isotope23's comment and my reply on his talk page. ---CH (talk) 21:08, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
- Done. Excellent argument by the way. -- Kjkolb 22:09, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
Architecture terms
Hey, Nice work on Architectural terms. I was really hoping someone would get around to doing that. There still may be many stray one or two sentence articles floating around out there. Perhaps a little intro would be good, but I'm glad someone finally took the initiative to do that. It might go well in Category:Terminology. Anyway, great work! --DanielCD 22:47, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Anon edit on your user page
Hi. Are you aware that User:61.247.237.243 added the sentence "Why are you concerned as to what others include about their organisation? Why do you need to edit that Mr.?" to the "Shortcuts" section of your user page? I am letting you know in case you haven't noticed it. --BorgQueen 22:06, 10 November 2005 (UTC)