User talk:LGagnon
|
|
| Contents |
category:fictional places
Hi - A while ago, you changed category:fictional places into a redirect to category:fictional locations. I don't know if you already know this, but category redirects effectively don't work (articles added to the redirected category don't show up in the "redirected to" category, etc.). I'll put category:fictional places in WP:CFD. -- Rick Block 02:14, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
boston meetup?
Hi LG, we're planning a Boston meetup on Nov 20 or 21. Leave a note on that page if you think you could make it. +sj+ 06:54, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Palahniuk Photos
Believe it or not, I just brought the photos in for development today. I will add one, I promise. I have got to get one of those digital cameras already. --Feitclub 16:24, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)
Adminship
Recently I did some analysis of contribution history for Wikipedia, the fruits of which are at Wikipedia:Another list of Wikipedians in order of arrival. As I reviewed the list, I noted that there are about a dozen longtime contributors who have not been made administrators. You are one of them. Accordingly, I would like to nominate you for adminship, with your permission. If you would appreciate such a nomination, please let me know on my talk page. If you do wish to decline, a note so saying would also be appreciated, though not necessary. Kindest regards, The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:48, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Wild accusations
Accusing me of flaming when I am conciliatory towards you and threatening to tittletattle to an admin (as if they were teachers you could run to rather than just other editors! They are not the police, just people like you and I) instead of sorting out the problem you have with me for opposing your nomination for admin convince me even further to strongly oppose your elevation to adminship. As I said, I don't see the point of discussing this further. I will not respond to further comment from you on this issue in the hopes that you will back off and involve yourself in other work on Wikipedia.Dr Zen 04:46, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC) I have asked you not to continue the conflict with me. Because you would not, I have blocked you from commenting on my talk page. I deplore your threatening me. That makes you, more than anything else, totally unsuitable for becoming an admin.Dr Zen 05:03, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Hi, LGagnon. I sent you an e-mail through the "E-mail this user" function many hours ago. Did you get it?--[[User:Bishonen|Bishonen ( talk)]] 22:11, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Dr Zen
So, I'm not the only one who thinks Dr Zen is a troll. RickK 23:41, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)
He has openly attacked me on Talk:Yasser Arafat and accused me of "bias" when I pointed out the fallacy in his argument. I would appreciate it if you could explain to me the history of your interaction with Dr. Zen. You may email me (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Emailuser&target=Viriditas) or respond on my talk page. Thank you. --Viriditas 02:30, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I have attempted to resolve my differences with Dr. Zen. Let's see how long it lasts. I encourage you to do the same, if you are able. --Viriditas 11:11, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Adminship
I read your note on my talk page. You are correct that much of the problem is in the adminship process itself, rather than being entirely a matter of your actions. The process for approving adminship nominations is a frustrating one and it is not usual for nominations to be voted down for unfair reasons. I apologize for my role in this.
I hope you will continue to contribute to Wikipedia, despite its flaws. If you should wish to seek adminship at some point in the future, let me know and I will help as best I can.
Very kindest regards
The Uninvited Co., Inc. 04:01, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Article Licensing
Hi, I've started the Free the Rambot Articles Project which has the goals of getting users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to...
- ...all U.S. state, county, and city articles...
- ...all articles...
using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) version 1.0 and 2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to the GFDL (which every contribution made to Wikipedia is licensed under), but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles (See the Multi-licensing Guide for more information). Since you are among the top 1000 most active Wikipedians, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles.
- Nutshell: Wikipedia articles can be shared with any other GFDL project but open/free projects using the incompatible Creative Commons Licenses (e.g. WikiTravel) can't use our stuff and we can't use theirs. It is important to us that other free projects can use our stuff. So we use their licenses too.
To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} template (or {{MultiLicensePD}} for public domain) into their user page, but there are other templates for 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 at my talk page what you think. -- Ram-Man 18:03, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
Category:Smashing Pumpkins
Hi LGagnon, I've changed Category:Smashing Pumpkins a bit. Please see the talk page. I wanted to warn you, since I expect you'll have an opinion one way or the other. Please let me know if you disagree with what I've done. Thanks, --Dbenbenn 02:46, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I changed your redirection about the Key Values of the Green Party. The Green Party is not only the american Green Party, but on the contrary a world wide organisation sharing common values, defined in key values and pillars. Please be careful not to propagate american centrism on this project. Thanks. Anthere 09:24, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Only US party ? Ah ? ... I think we often refers to them... 6 principles and 10 values. Hmmmmm. Well, if you say so...never mind Anthere
List of grunge music albums
You stuck an accuracy dispute tag on that page, but you didn't indicate what you are disputing. Please, either clarify your issues or remove the tag. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:09, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
Song lyrics
You made a comment on my talk page a few days ago regarding me adding links to song lyrics in song articles here on Wikipedia. I commented on that, but you have not followed up, so would you please go to my talk page and respond to my comments, as I maintain that links to song lyrics do not constitute a copyright violation, as the lyric sites themselves are legal with the appropriate copyright notices provided. Thank you. Solver 14:38, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Taking God's name in vain
Concerning your comments on how taking God's name in vain is really about breaking a contract:
I agree, up to a point. First of all, we really don't know how the phrase was understood in the time of Moses. We have an excellent understanding of Jewish thinking around 600-700, due to the Talmud, and a pretty good understanding for a few centuries prior to that, but Moses was a couple of millenia back. Second, "taking God's name in vain" has been used to refer to profanity, especially that involving "God", "Jesus", etc., in both European and American christian circles for centuries. When English speakers hear "taking God's name in vain", they think "profanity", whether they agree that this is what it means or not.
But, again, you are basically right. So, how to restate this? -- Nowhither 03:05, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
Footnotes
I guess (and it is only a guess) that "Notes" arose as a section title because, strictly speaking, they do not appear at the foot of the page. --Theo (Talk) 07:03, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
lots of edits, not an admin
Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. Since you've been previously nominated I added an '*' immediately before your name in this list. If for any reason you're NOT interested, my apologies and please remove the '*' (you could entirely remove yourself from the list also, if you'd like). I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:31, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
Category:Causes célèbres
I notice you added Jeff Luers to this category. It's been voted for deletion but I am trying to save it. Please come to Votes for undeletion to express your view. David 
| Talk 00:00, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Jello Biafra
To be honest, that bit with Black Flag and the Dead Kennedys reads worse after your revert. What it now appears to say is "These two bands was one of the first US Bands..." I'd suggest either removing the reference to Black Flag (band) or make an edit similar to the one I made. -- Xinit 07:01, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)