User talk:Christopher Mahan
|
|
| Contents |
Barnstar
I award you this barnstar for valiant defense of NPOV. Do w it what you like, or delete it, etc.. Cheers, Sam [Spade (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Sam_Spade&action=edit§ion=new)] 20:39, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
hi
is it you who asked me if I wrote the text myself? somebody send a message but since it is my first time here I probably deleted it by mistake
Any way I wrote the text my self. My grandfather was an officer of the Cretan Gendarmerie
What is the meaning of the initials NPOV?
I have put the same text in my site as well (www.geocities.com/sssksadk/) I also have some photos there
Christopher, try using {{msg:welcome}} to give the newbies some helpful links. ;) --Dante Alighieri | Talk 00:32, Nov 6, 2004 (UTC)
Company names
Greetings — can I ask why you are moving all Japanese companies to their formal name with "Ltd." or whatever postfixed? While this should by all means be noted in the article itself, for the title I think this adds no useful information and just creates redirects and hassles Strictly speaking, they aren't even the real formal names, you should be using "K.K." or the appropriate Japanese legal term... Jpatokal 06:44, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- On a related note, please discuss the Toyota move before moving ahead with it. Thanks! --SFoskett 18:56, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)
Vandalism
Hi... may i ask why messages regarding vandalism that is done by "me" pops everytime I visit Wikipedia? Although the IP address is similar to mine, but I had NOT visited any pages in Wikipedia that has been reported to be vandalised by "me". Please comment.
Regards
Dick Cheney
I think the page on Dick Cheney should be unprotected for now because you said it should be unprotected after November 6. Please unlock it. Marcus2 23:42, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
- Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
- Multi-Licensing Guide
- Free the Rambot Articles Project
To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:
- Option 1
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
OR
- Option 2
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit§ion=new)| talk)
- Quoth: I will not release my work with less than GFDL
- The CC-by-sa license is compatible in the ways that you've mentioned for the GFDL. In fact the GFDL is much less clear on what giving proper credit consitutes. It does not require that every editor receive credit, just that the 5 people that did the most work get credit. The CC-by-sa requires much clearer attribution. In addition, in both the GFDL and CC-by-sa, your contributions can be sold commercially. The GFDL requires a few restrictions, but they don't stop someone from making money off of your work. The CC-by-sa also allows commercial usage. For what its worth, I don't regret one bit working with the GFDL here at Wikipedia. It is surely better than nothing, but that doesn't mean the CC-by-sa isn't a better alternative. It is clear that you do not agree that we should use the public domain, a feeling that I share, but others do not. The CC-by-sa is NOT less than the GFDL. If anything it is MORE. – Ram-Man (comment (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit§ion=new)) (talk)[[]] 19:49, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
RFC pages on VfD
Should RFC pages be placed on VfD to be deleted? I'm considering removing Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Slrubenstein, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jwrosenzweig and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/John Kenney from WP:VFD. Each of them was listed by CheeseDreams. Your comments on whether I should do this would be appreciated. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:28, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Toyota
The issue is tricky. I would think that Toyota refers to the brand name and the keiretsu (group), And the article should inlcude a list of cars and the links to different sub-companies, and also the history of the entire group. If people are looking for Toyota, they are mostly looking for cars, and Toyota cars are also made by Denso and other Toyota group companies. The current Toyota page is rather dissapointing, and I would move most content of Toyota Motor Corporation back to Toyota, including the history and the list of cars. For most people, TMC and the toyota group is the same. -- Chris 73 Talk 01:20, Dec 21, 2004 (UTC)
Sony/Sony Corporation arsery
While I also appreciate your willingness to contribute, what you're contributing is not helpful. If there's a significant difference between the two terms, it can be discussed in the article, it does not need to reflected in the page titles. I see from your talk page that you've had many other complaints about doing this - please take a moment to reflect on whether that means you should continue.
I reserve the right to describe someone's behaviour as arse-ish if I think it is. Dtcdthingy
In your reply to this, you used the example of United States of America. You'll find it located at United States. Similarly, I live in The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Its article is at United Kingdom.
The answer to the Sony problem is to move everything back to Sony. Then you can explain the difference between Sony the Brand, Sony the Corporation and Sony the Whatever Else within the general Sony article. Hell, you can even create a new Sony Corporation page, and a Sony (brand) page that discuss those exclusively. -- Dtcdthingy 18:54, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Explanation
At the time that I redirected the Mitsubishi Companies article, I merged all of the information into the Mitsubishi article. The companies article was just a brief introduction and a long list of mostly red links, which were duplicated in the Mitsubishi article anyway, and the Mitsubishi article itself didn't have so much content that splitting the articles was necessary.
Since that point (almost a year ago now), it appears that the Mitsubishi article has changed significantly, resulting in the removal of the information that I merged. I haven't been involved in the development of the article, so that's all the explanation I can provide. --Michael Snow 01:03, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Rumsfeld
Hi there, sorry I forgot to title my edit on Rumsfeld, but what's up with removing it? If there are pages for Frank Olson, Church Committee, MKULTRA and Donald Rumsfeld had a documented roll in connecting those three historical phenomena, don't you think there ought to be an explanation of that on the Rumsfeld page? Mdog
I changed it because the story was written by a reporter for the Baltimore Sun and picked up by the SF Chronicle, which is where it came up when I did a search for it. I originally wrote Chronicle because I hadn't noticed the true authorship myself. If you wouldn't mind reverting back to what I put up I'd appreciate it, I have to run to the dentist right now myself. Mdog 21:12, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Treblinka extermination camp
Hi Chris. You appear to be the author of the Treblinka extermination camp article. I've been trying to do some work cleaning up the footnotes in it. I've added one reference that you appear to have left out as well (Steiner). There are still some references to page numbers for which I can't tell the sources. I'd also appreciate it if you could check to make sure I'm getting the footnotes right. Thanks. Jayjg (talk) 19:16, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Ah. I saw your more recent edits on the page, and thought you might have been keeping track of it. I tracked down the deleted reference, which was the same as what I'd added, but a different edition. I also had to fix up a bunch of footnotes, which obviously got messed up when that person deleted the reference years ago. Jayjg (talk) 19:49, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Question about NEC/Mitsubishi Article
Could you please answer the question I asked on the talk page of the NEC/Mitsubishi Talk Page. TIA. Reub2000 07:56, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)