User talk:Rbs
|
|
| Contents |
Mars
Great work on the MER-A Sol timestamps. This makes the sol concept much clearer to readers. --Sennheiser! 00:28, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- Just a matter of firing up Mars24 and iterating input for 10-15 minutes. 'Course, I haven't done MER-B yet. --rbs
- I noticed that the NASA press releases are starting to do the same thing. (example) (http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/status.html). Nice work on the Pete Theisinger article by the way.
- The Theisinger info is just boilerplate off a Caltech and a NASA TV website. The sol info, it's surprising JPL has not been regularly including it. If you find the old Pathfinder website and check the daily status reports, for the first month of the mission they regularly included sunrise, sunset, Earthrise, and Earthset times in the write-ups. --rbs
Hello. Thanks for fixing the my-bad on Morningside Heights. Does anyone actually call it "The Riverside Church," though? In my experience, I don't think I've heard anyone who works there use the word "The," not even the Rev. Dr. Forbes (whom I had the pleasure of interviewing a couple years ago). I guess it's not really a big deal either way. -- Wikisux 05:30, Mar 7, 2004 (UTC)
- I don't think I've ever heard call it "The" in conversation but before making the last edit I doublechecked the church website. Turns out the full name is "The Riverside Church in the City of New York". (Oy! I guess they've been taking naming lessons from Columbia University in the City of New York.) To be true, it doesn't really matter, especially since there's no Wiki entry for it yet anyway.
- This has all reminded me, I think I'll also add the Interchurch Center to the list of neighborhood landmarks. Hmmm and what else... - Rbs 06:50, 2004 Mar 7 (UTC)
thanks!
I know it has been a while, but thanks for removing the untruth posted on Paul O'Neill (baseball player). I just today removed the same piece of rubbish from Paul O'Neill. Cheers, Kingturtle 00:38, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Image:Merb-Pancam Sol1 Postcard part br.jpg
User:Diberri/Image tag request --Diberri | Talk 23:44, Aug 31, 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 2000 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)