User talk:Anlace/Archive 4

Importance and quality ratings....

Anlace, I noticed most (if not all) of your "importance" and "quality" ratings include some sort of justification for the rating. Those few words make the ratings so much more meaningful. There are many rated articles that offer absolutely NO justification for the rating. Any chance of you re-rating articles without the justification? Or do you already review ratings of others? Personally, I am lousy at that sort of analysis, but I appreciate it when it is done well. Schmiteye 21:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sonoma County/Invitation

Thanks, Anlace. Regret I can't commit myself to a deadline for upgrading the Sonoma County article. It needs a lot of work, especially in the History section, and a new Economy/Business&Industry section. I'll continue to edit as I find the time. The same goes for the Wikipedia:WikiProject San Francisco Bay Area. I'm primarily interested in the North Bay area > Sonoma County > Santa Rosa. -- Mukrkrgsj 08:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK Whiteray pygmy daisy

On 23 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Whiteray pygmy daisy, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

re: SFBA

Hello, thanks for your invite. I will consider it but have two pressing projects ahead.

Normally, I rate articles for the projects I am part of and do complimentary ratings for other projects that I feel will not mind me being WP:BOLD like with the SFBA because I belong to the WP:CAL. Because I am a Recent Changes Patrol editor and due to the 1000 plus articles I have on Watch, I see a lot of pages that I try to help with small edits. I enjoy rating articles because usually that generates action from other projects or because another editor wants to bring up the article a class based upon some of the recommendations I have made. Cheers, Ronbo76 05:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Freedom to roam -- regarding Enontekiö, Finland

I'm sorry to see that you reverted my removal of User:Vuo's unsubstantiated claim that the municipality of Enontekiö would somehow have an exception to the everyman's right with regards to berry picking. As far as I know no such restriction is currently active, although I found out there is an old mechanism in the law (law #332/1955: Laki luonnonvaraisten tuotteiden keräämisen rajoittamisesta eräissä tapauksissa, [1]) that allows the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry to issue decrees to protect certain areas in the Province of Lapland from exploitation by others than the local population. Based on the text of the law it seems that such a decree is issued only on demand and none seem to exist at the moment because I couldn't find any "backlinks" (decrees based on) to the law in the Finlex legislative database. Also, all the governmental material released on the subject of berry picking or everyman's rights in general seem to happily disregard this very issue.

So all I meant to say is that I made a good faith effort to substantiate ~~the clearly~~ what I believe to be an erroneous detail even against my instincts (NB. I didn't even know that the law mentioned above existed) but were not able to — so I WP:BOLDly deleted the statement and was going to explain myself to User:Vuo and the article talk page but became distracted. So, how are we to proceed — how can I persuade you into believing that in this case less is more (and actually more correct) and there's (most probably) no evidence to be found in favor of the disputed statement? --jibun_{≈παντα ρει≈} (keskustele!) 21:45, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your argument is convincing. You may remove it and i shall not alter your edit. Regards. Anlace 01:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hilarious

Regarding this - yeah, I was the one who removed the stub tag...and then went on to type "Stub" instead of "Start" :) Guettarda 05:48, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

no problem. i actually considered it still as stub until today. Today ive doubled the size of the article and its certainly no stub at present. :) cheers. Anlace 05:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wine Country (California)

On 4 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Wine Country (California), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 23:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 5 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pitkin Marsh lily, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--ALoan (Talk) 09:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Richardson.jpg

Hi there. You uploaded a photo of William Richardson and someone has replaced it with what appears to be an incorrect photo from another era. You might want to contact the person who replaced it and ask why they did that.

--Mactographer 06:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sonoma volcanics

You have some geological information in the Wine Country (California) article which I removed as it in error. You should not use this source and this information in other articles about geology of the area, as it is not stated correctly, and the source you cite does not actually give the information you included in the article. The Pliocene-late Miocene Sonoma Volcanics are most likely eruptive and intrusive assemblages from various volcanic centers over a period of time due to the opening of the San Andreas Fault System. The latest maps of the Santa Rosa area are available on-line through the USGS, a 1958 map may have incorrect geological information. KP Botany 04:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Galbreath Wildlands Preserve

Anlace, you've done such a great job on the Fairfield Osborn Preserve article that I'd like to suggest you consider an article on the 3,500 acre Fred B. Galbreath Wildlands Preserve given to Sonoma State University in 2004. Reference: Guy Kovner, "'A Piece of Heaven': Galbreath Trust donates wilderness tract to Sonoma State," Press Democrat, March 28, 2004, B1, B3. Dwalls 02:01, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anlace, the geology in this article is problematic. This is from the abstract to the session you cite for your information:

"The 60-km-long Rodgers Creek fault (RCF), located between San Pablo Bay and Santa Rosa, California, strikes approximately N35°W, and is characterized by a late Holocene right-lateral slip rate of 6.4 to 10.4 mm/yr.

You have translate this to:

"Sonoma Mountain itself is not a volcano but a fault-block mountain estimated to be uplifting at a rate of 6.4 to 10.4 millimeters per year along the Rodgers Creek Fault.[4]"

And you give this USGS session abstract, the one I quote above, as your source. When a geologist states a "right-lateral slip rate," although their may be compressional uplift involved along the fault, this information is in fact a "right-lateral slip rate," not an "uplift rate" as you have called it. As you are a physicist, it seems unlikely you would make this mistake, so maybe you read the uplift rate in some other article, or the uplift rate is quoted in a paper from the session, and you mixed these up. I am very concerned about your geology in a number of articles, and I am removing the geology session from this article. In addition, while soil surveys are good general sources for soil characteristics, your information from the soil survey is too specific for the timing of the survey (1930s) and the methods used (aerial photographs of vegetation), and soil is not geology, it's a different science. KP Botany 03:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You marked The Journal of Irreproducible Results as a stub, and want more information. I'm the editor. Ask me whatever you like and I'll tell you what I can.

By the way, the Ig Nobels were created as a JIR activity. Marc took them with him when he left.

Best wishes, 64.121.56.100 02:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC)Norman Sperling nsperling@california.com[reply]

John Game images

Anlace,

I thought you said you were unable to connect with John Game to confirm his permission to upload his images. As we discussed before, without Wikipedia already having a copy of the permission from this photorapher for his copyrighted images, they MUST be deleted immediately from Wikipedia. Please take care of deleting the images immediately, then seek his permission. KP Botany 08:08, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems with Image:Jcgamelastheniatopview.jpeg

An image that you uploaded, Image:Jcgamelastheniatopview.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. KP Botany 19:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems with Image:Jcgamelasthenia.jpeg

An image that you uploaded, Image:Jcgamelasthenia.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. KP Botany 19:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Selective Sound Sensitivity Syndrome

Hi, Sir. Terribly sorry to edit your page, but I am not sure how else to contact you. I notice you are quite active on the "Noise Pollution" page, and I wonder if you might somehow link the Selective Sound Sensitivity Syndrome page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_Sound_Sensitivity_Syndrome) somehow to it. If not, sorry to bother you. (Email address removed) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Orinlouis (talk • contribs)

Link has been added. Anlace 23:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Forest and the carbon cycle

Hi Anlace, You might want to double check your edit to the deforestation article. For one the source provided appears to be an add for a book. Second the lines you reinserted are making a argument where none exist. The fact the a forest is a carbon store is not in dispute. As for the statement about a drier climate that is discussed near the top of the article. Regards, KAM 18:11, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:AlexNewArtBot

Hi Anlace/Archive 4, as a WikiProject Scotland participant, please check out this this thread and consider adding the bot results page to your watchlist so we can manually update the New Articles page. There are some false results for the first batch, but I'm sure we can collectively tune the rules to improve the output.

If we get enough people watching the results page, we'll be cooking with gas as they say :) This looks like a great helper in finding new Scotland related material. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 22:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC

DYK

On 10 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chillingham Cattle, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Andrew Levine 20:44, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

On 10 October, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alby, Sweden, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Peta 10:11, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Energy portal

Hi Anlace! In view of your interests I thought you may like to provide some ideas for future content on the new energy portal, now that there is one... Gralo 21:01, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 3 October, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mölle, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

On 5 October, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Halltorps, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

did you know?

On 27 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pacific herring, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 13:10, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On November 29, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Annadel State Park, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

. Great work once again and another pictured slot. Regards, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:25, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Redbelliedlemur.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Redbelliedlemur.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. MECU≈talk 03:34, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what defines "consistent" spelling...

...is that the authorities in the field use it consistently, and for WP's purposes, it is spelled the same in all articles. I went to the trouble of removing all the hyphens from the term "honey bee" on the Colony Collapse Disorder page, and you put them back; the use of a hyphen is NOT the way bee scientists spell the name, nor is it used in any of the other articles on honey bees in WP. If you can find other articles which hyphenate it, you can help out by removing the hyphens in the future. Thanks, Dyanega 10:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Elsie article

Thank you for the comment! Right now I'm on a bit of a Bay Area history kick. Actually, if you're also interested in Bay Area history, or just the Bay Area in general, you might you consider joining WikiProject San Francisco Bay Area. It looks like you've made a number of contributions to Bay Area-related topics. I just created a History of the Bay Area page, and it'd be great if more people could contribute. If you'd like to join, just add your name to the members list. If not, no worries. Take care! — Emiellaiendiay 18:35, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Central heating

i agree with you completely on this major rewrite. i almost added this tag yesterday. what do you think would make a good outline? i think we still need the history section...its the closest thing to actual content we have here. i also think we need some section related to energy conservation. regards. by the way great work on the Flue gas stack article. i think one of your works should be in the references though for completeness. if you dont add it ill have to take a best guess where to cite it Anlace 20:32, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to learn that we are in agreement that Central heating needs a re-write ... and, yes, the history section should stay in. I am too busy to work on it, so have a go at it! As for how to use the citation.php for multiple insertions, I strongly suggest that you look at Help:Footnotes#Multiple_insertion_of_the_same_reference which I think has a much better explanation than than Wikipedia:Footnotes#Multiple uses of the same footnote recommended by Circeus ... probably because I wrote it. :) - mbeychok 22:03, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gettlinge on DYK

On 21 January, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gettlinge, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thank you for your contributions. — ERcheck (talk) 15:47, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

==[Monkey River]]==

hello. i noticed you did the original assessment of this article. i have now expanded the article beyond a stub and i welcome your re-assessment at this time. thank you. cheers. Anlace 20:57, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment upgraded to B; great article! Srice13 21:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

citizendium

www.citizendium.org maybe you would enjoy editing here as well. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.151.250.38 (talk) 22:55, 11 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Overfishing

Howdy, I started a discussion on Talk:Overfishing to discuss the image caption which we have both edited. Briefly, my feeling is that describing catch data as "overfishing" is original research. If you would like to contribute to the discussion there, I would appreciate it. Thanks, --TeaDrinker 23:12, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cockscombs

Are you sure guans have combs? They have wattles, and some species have feathered crest (bird)s, but do any have fleshy combs? --Macrakis 23:03, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I don't want to "fight about it" either. You seem to know much more than I do about birds, so if you say some species have combs, no problem, please go ahead and remove the disputed tag. --Macrakis 23:21, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eketorp on DYK

On 20 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Eketorp, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Mgm|^(talk) 09:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

End of civilization

I agree global warming is the most likely catalyst for the "end of the world as we know it". An ecological disaster resulting from global warming would certainly stop the world economy and consumerism in its tracks, which forms much of our 21st century global civilization. Humans would have to learn to live more like our simple living ancestors, possibly returning the world to an Eden-like paradise. Peace, nirvana2013 17:52, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for your response. and its not just global warming, but deforestation and the Holocene mass extinction are right up there along with water crisis and collapse of arable land. cheers. Anlace 18:04, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Although perhaps not perfect, I am much happier with the new title Risks to civilization, humans and planet Earth than End of civilization. My main problem with the old title was that the article seemed to treat civilization and humanity as the same thing. One can have humans without civilization. Civilization is a relatively modern concept in humankind's history, dating from Ancient Egypt. Regarding the end of civilization, John D. Croft created the article stub Fall of a civilisation. nirvana2013 09:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Polyphenol antioxidant

Great work on this article! I've written a "jargon report" on the talk pages with, I think, useful comments on making this article more accessible. Circeus 03:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

if you look closely at the "Topical application of polyphenol antioxidants"section,you'll notice that there are 2 opening <ref> tag, but only a closing one. I deleted a section of text that only repeated the previous one:

Deleted text, which was actually in the footnote dut to thelack of a closing </ref> after "Clin Exp Dermatol. 2001 Oct;26(7):578-82":

There is increasing evidence that reactive oxygen species play a pivotal role in the process of aging. The skin, as the outermost barrier of the body, is exposed to various exogenous sources of oxidative stress, in particular UV-irradiation. These are believed to be responsible for the extrinsic type of skin aging, termed photo-aging. It therefore seems possible to increase levels of protective low molecular may produce anti-aging effects on human skin. Indeed, various in vitro and animal studies

Observe also that the end sentence is the beginning of what continues after note [12]

Text preceding the note:

There is some data that reactive oxygen species play a role in the process of aging. The skin is exposed to various exogenous sources of oxidative stress, including ultraviolet radiation. These spectral components are generally viewed as responsible for the extrinsic type of skin aging, sometimes termed photo-aging. It has been shown not only that increased levels of protective low molecular weight antioxidants through a diet rich in phytochemicals, but also by direct topical dermal application

This is the same information as the deleted text, save for a single sentence fragment that happens to be slipped within the note. I deleted no fact. Circeus 16:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know

On 1 December, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Brush Creek (Sonoma County), which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 12:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Horne Church

Did you see this [2] - given that the church was constructed before Martin Luther's The 95 Theses his logic is way off base - I stopped myself from reverting it though, because the article is ambiguous as to whether or not the church was originally built as a catholic church (certainly true) or whether or not it is currently a catholic church. Cheers. --Mcginnly | Natter 16:55, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have put the matter very well. I have reverted and added clarification. Thanks. Cheers. Anlace 17:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problems - I'll cross-post this to the talk page so people know what your edit summary meant. See ya - btw someone wrote up POETS day haha. --Mcginnly | Natter 17:16, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please chime in if you have a view

There's an interesting experience going on over at WikiProject California, and WikiProject Southern California.

Some time ago, WikiProject California members had placed their project tags on all articles about California cities. Those tags have been in place for some time. Recently certain members of WikiProject Southern California, after discussion on that project's talk page (only), decided to remove the WikiProject California tags for (almost all) Southern California cities, and replace the tags with WikiProject Southern California tags - only.

That is, the WikiProject Southern California members didn't simply add the WikiProject Southern California tag to Southern California cities, the WikiProject California tags were completely removed. This was done apparently without consultation with the WikiProject California members.

We are gathering responses to the following questions on those projects' talk pages:

Do you have a view whether the WikiProject California tag should be removed from a large number of cities in Southern California?

Do you have a view whether city article for Southern California cities should have more than one WikiProject tag?

Please let us know if you have a view! Spamreporter1 16:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was kinda surprised I couldn't find it covered in something like Wikipedia:Global perspective or Wikipedia:Global Point Of View--after all the cleanup tag is {globalize}

RE This edit of yours: Exactly, and thank you. I could swear sometime in the past 4 years on Wikipedia I've seen that precise point in that context written somewhere in WP's copious guidelines/docs, but after that was removed by Ronbo76, I spent an hour or two looking without success. Do you happen to know if/where it's written? I mean, I consider it to be an obvious, common sense extension to the general NPOV guidelines, but it would be nice to have some place specific to point non-believers to. 71.231.107.188 04:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dont know of a guideline, but it seems obvious to me that every non-USA reader need not be familiar with all the states, just as americans should not be expected to known all the provinces of a european country. even though the state in question, california, is well known, i think this common sense principle applies. regards. Anlace 04:17, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick reply. It seems obvious to me, as well, but I have run into soooooo many editors that apparently share Ronbo76's viewpoint I really hope to find some place where it's spelled out for them--assuming everyone knows California is in the US, is as US-centric as assuming everyone knows that Qaraghandy is in Kazakhstan, is Kazakhstan-centric. 71.231.107.188 04:28, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

James Burnett, Lord Monboddo

Thanks for better integrating the Insensibles and Wood Eaters content into the article. It was such a huge job to merge the articles I just didn't have the time to merge 'em well :) --Lukobe 19:54, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images

This image you uploaded from CalFlora states explicitly on the image at CalFlora that it may not be used without express written persmission of the photographer, yet nowhere in the copyright information does it state that the copyright holder gives his express written permission for its use, it only states creative commons. If you are John Games and the photographer, I believe you should clarify by stating this on the image. If you are not the photographer, you must forward his permission to permissions. If neither of these conditions are met, the image cannot be used. Please clarify this issue ASAP. KP Botany 02:43, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i have no idea what image you are speaking of. in the future please post such comments as above on the talk page of the image in question. i am watching each talk page of images i have uploaded. also that method will allow others who are watching such a talk page the opportunity to respond as appropriate. furthermore your use of the topic "permissions" is not a usage meaningful to me. you may want to elaborate or define such a channel on the talk page of the image you are trying to address. thank you Anlace 04:09, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If "permissions" is not meaningful to you, you probably should not be uploading images that are not yours. Any photograph copyrighted by another party must have that party's permission e-mailed to Wikipedia's permissions in order to be used on Wikipedia. The question is do you have permission to use John Games' images on Wikipedia? And it can be put on your talk page because it appears it may concern more than one image, if you indeed don't know what "permission" is. I will paste this all to the Image:Thornwort.jpg|left|200px|thumb page, also, as you're correct, these conservations should be had on those pages. KP Botany 03:11, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, this one is not your image. I apologize. KP Botany 03:48, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Real problem, wrong image (Image:Thornwort.jpg is a cropped version of Image:Jgameaduttoniihr.jpeg). I've added imagevio tags to both pages. I'm OK with discussion happening on the talk pages of the images, but established procedures also call for putting something on the talk page of the uploader. Here's the boilerplate for what to do next: == Copyright problems with Image:Jgameaduttoniihr.jpeg ==

An image that you uploaded, Image:Jgameaduttoniihr.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kingdon 14:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdon 14:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Environment barnstar

I have created a barnstar for Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment. Please visit the talk page to vote for the barnstar since there are no votes for 2 months. OhanaUnited 02:54, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suisun Shrew

It is preferred that the source used be the referenced source, not the source that your source references. Also, inline references are greatly preferred over bulk references. Please stop adding new information and move the references into the text using <ref> tags. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:37, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i didnt make the edit you allude to. Anlace 00:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! - UtherSRG (talk) 17:48, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Addition to Light pollution article

Hi Anlace. Thanks for the recent additions to the Light pollution article. I was wondering if you have any citations of sources available for the statements you've added, though. (Particularly the note about elevated blood pressure and stress under fluorescent lights, and the dimished sexual performance.) It wouldn't exactly surprise me too much for these claims to be completely true, but the article in general looks better if it can back things up with citations. Thanks. Izogi 07:56, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. The updates are great -- thanks for taking the time. My own field of study is computer science, and my interest in light pollution has been a spinoff of my interest in amateur astronomy, so I'm not really an expert on something like atmospheric diffraction. I'm happy to look at it all the same (will have to wait a couple of days). But yeah, I have a great appreciation for having references on things.

With light pollution in particular, I've noticed that there are a lot of people out there making quite big claims, but not properly backing them up. Even organisations like the IDA are hugely guilty of this with things like the information sheets they provide, I think, which I haven't found to be at all detailed about where the information's come from, where it applies, how up-to-date it is, and so on. Coming from an organisation that clearly has an agenda, it makes it that much harder to use un-sourced material, and for my own efforts, it's made it really difficult to be confident about anything I've tried to argue in front of people. I was just thinking it'd be great if the Wikipedia article could really out-do a lot of those other sources when it comes to actually providing references about the claims it makes. Izogi 19:01, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copright violations

Do you have John Game's "express written permission" to upload his images to Wikipedia from CalPhotos? You told me to post on the image talk pages, and Kingdon did, but you failed to respond. What is the story? KP Botany 23:14, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

see the image talk page. should not be an issue. Anlace 23:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please add explicit information to all images you upload from other photographers. Game is a federal worker, so I see no reason why he wouldn't do it, but for a professional photographer, they're giving away a lot of their rights to their artistic work via a Creative Commons license, like the right for others to make money off of their work without the permission of the photographer--I can make a calendar of Game's Wikipedia pictures and sell it, as long as I acknowledge him as the photographer, use it in pornographic clips, add it as a logo to my company brochures, as long as I end-license in the same manner and give credit. It's a lot of release of artistic license for a professional photographer, so it's useful to be very clear to Wikipedia users that this is precisely what has been done, in particular when the photographer has requested a much stricter license elsewhere on the Internet. Thanks. KP Botany 23:38, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for your help kp in assisting in getting these protocols clear. for my part i shall attempt to be as explicit as possible with upload detail for images. regards. Anlace 23:51, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, they're great images. Oftentimes federal work cannot actually be copyrighted, so getting very high quality, well-identified images from a federal worker is a very sharp way of going about it--and for many of these obscure species, there simply are no great photographs. Just think of some form sentence to put when you upload them, you'll eventually get in the habit, and that will take care of it. KP Botany 00:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Head-to-head JAC

“

i thought you would challenge me today on a "head-to-head"..... :) Anlace 04:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

”

Well, I'm challenging you now! If you accept, reply on my talk page. *smiles* — Emiellaiendiay 01:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Would you mind reviewing Piedmont Middle School for reassessment and then updating the JAC page? The seven days are up, and I can't review my own work. Thank you!