User talk:Martpol

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

• To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
• Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
• If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
• Follow the Wikipedia:Simplified Ruleset
• Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
• Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
• Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

Template:DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual

Contents

1 Article Licensing 2 Instrumental songs in song lists 3 Internet vs. internet 4 Edit summary

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&section=new)| talk)

Instrumental songs in song lists

I noticed that you re-added the song "New Orleans Instrumental No.1" by R.E.M. to the List of songs whose title includes geographical names. I have once again removed it, as discussed in my December 18, 2004 update of "Major article reorganization" on the talk page, because it has been the general practice of these song lists (at least the ones I've been monitoring) to not include instrumental songs, on the basis that there is no singing. You may not agree with this; I myself am not sure this is necessarily the best practice. However, it is the accepted practice. If you wish to bring it up as a policy that should be changed, please post a new topic to the talk page so it can be discussed further by the users of this list. Thank you for your cooperation. — Jeff Q 07:09, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Internet vs. internet

Excellent work on the James Bond 21 article earlier today. However, Internet is supposed to be capitalized, especially when used in the context of "the Internet" since there is only one. If you check the Internet article, there is a rationale given for this in the introduction (it's also capitalized in the Oxford dictionary). Cheers! 23skidoo 18:02, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

What's with all the articles on these Welsh rocks? Do they have any kind of significance? Roughly how large are they? Everyking 13:37, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Well, I don't have any problem with the articles provided there is something to actually say about these rocks, besides where they are and the fact that they are rocks. If not, it would probably be better to merge them into one article, maybe in a list format. Everyking 14:22, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Edit summary

Hello. Please remember to always provide an edit summary. Thanks and happy edits. Alphax ^τεχ 13:35, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)