User talk:Asher196

Archives

/Archive 1

Hi, I just wondered why you undid my revision to the pacman listing. Any lyric search will confirm what I said. Go easy on me as this is the first time I've tried to edit a Wiki page. I'm not sure this is the right place to contact you either.. sandomenico69 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandomenico69 (talk • contribs) 16:59, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you marked my pictures for speedy deletion. I have already discussed some of this with Ian. The pictures you marked, you said that new free-use pictures could be taken of the living people in the pictures. That is correct, but some of the pictures is about more than the people. It is about the event. For example, one of the pictures was taken during a Finals game in 2004. Clearly, a new picture cannot be taken of something that happened in 2004. Another was taken in 2005 at a one-time event. Again, a new picture cannot be taken. Hope you can help me out with this situation. Thanks! Nickv1025 (talk) 03:48, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I can help you. The policy is pretty clear on this. "Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose. Where possible, non-free content is transformed into free material instead of using a fair-use defense, or replaced with a freer alternative if one of acceptable quality is available; "acceptable quality" means a quality sufficient to serve the encyclopedic purpose. (As a quick test, before adding non-free content requiring a rationale, ask yourself: "Can this non-free content be replaced by a free version that has the same effect?" and "Could the subject be adequately conveyed by text without using the non-free content at all?" If the answer to either is yes, the non-free content probably does not meet this criterion.)" The admin who will review the deletion request will decide what to do, although non-free images of living people are almost always deleted. Asher196 (talk) 03:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Very nice addition. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 19:44, 15 August 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Asher, I've made some additions and corrections. Please take a look. (I know you will, anywayz.) 7&6=thirteen (talk) 14:22, 18 August 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

I've warned the user on his or her talk page and submitted an application to have the article locked so IPs can not edit it due to 209.215.62.10's action, however it is unlikely the administrators will lock this article the first submission. If problems continue I'll repeat these steps, however I doubt once the IP receives the message on their user talk page and realize what could happen if they continue to add original research and unverified claims they will continue. Additionally I'll put the article on my watchlist. UniversalBread (talk) 00:35, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Asher196 (talk) 01:01, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, the article has been locked to avoid further vandalism. UniversalBread (talk) 19:30, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you've come into contact with this user numerous times and are aware that they appear to have no intentions here on Wikipedia other than to add copious amounts of original and just generally inappropriate information to various articles within the free encyclopedia. After seeing your recent revision of this individual's edits I have decided to make life on Wikipedia just a bit easier and report this user to an administrator. I'm confident an appropriate punishment will be distributed once the administrator realizes what those affiliated with Tate have had to endure. Perhaps this user's unresponsive nature to common attempts of communication means he or she is unaware of the rules due to stubbornest to tolerate other users, however I'm sure they will realize the error of their ways when they are temporarily blocked. Cheers, UniversalBread (talk) 01:28, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They have similarities in their edits but as you stated it's difficult to tell whether or not they are the same user since they do not communicate. I do not want to discourage this user from editing content, they appear to have some good ideas but need a general understanding of how Wikipedia works. Unfortunately this individual rarely visits their talk page and seems to be unaware of why his or her contributions where reverted. UniversalBread (talk) 01:35, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tate has recently been blocked indefinitely, perhaps when attempting to see why she was blocked she'll look at the Wikihelp pages. I hope this improves your progress with the LaVan Davis article, if you have any more problems let me know. UniversalBread (talk) 01:37, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help in this matter. Asher196 (talk) 01:52, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could use this photo. http://www.uscg.mil/history/weblighthouses/ausable.JPG Thanks. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 21:16, 18 August 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

If you could help, references need to be cleaned up. I am trying to get this reassessed by WikiProject Michigan. Thanks. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 11:29, 20 August 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

I'll do what I can. What specifically do I have to do with the references? Asher196 (talk) 02:04, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asher, Small thing (I think). We have multiple footnotes from the same source. I don't know how to do that. I'm trying to get the Michigan wiki project to review the rating on the article, and that kind of thing helps (I think). Thanks 7&6=thirteen (talk) 12:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

regarding the pics in GASCO page, i work in the same company & i asked my manager about them! :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nael615 (talk • contribs) 05:31, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop reverting my edits, if their is somthing wrong BJBot or anther bot will.--Cory Malik (talk) 23:57, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable non-free images of living persons are not allowed as per WP:NON-FREE. Asher196 (talk) 02:15, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no Carey Martin, she is a FICTIONAL character.--Cory Malik (talk) 00:01, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that, but the person portraying her is a real live person, and the fact that the article is about a fictional person doesn't get you around WP:NON-FREE. Asher196 (talk) 01:29, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I now realize i used the wrong lisence.The new lisence is more suitable for the image.--Cory Malik (talk) 03:42, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I realize why my other pics where deleted but this one seemed to be fine.--Cory Malik (talk) 04:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

USCG pictures? Needs infobox, too. Thanks. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 11:25, 25 August 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

I've got a start on this article. Added the infobox and did a little rewriting. More to come...Asher196 (talk) 02:23, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asher, No picture, no infobox. Help, pleas. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 14:31, 25 August 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

This article is a total mess. Much rewriting needed. Asher196 (talk) 02:28, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The on line resources are there, but the article isn't much. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 02:31, 26 August 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Image:Detourreef.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:DeTour Reef Light Station - Michigan.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:DeTour Reef Light Station - Michigan.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 02:00, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:DSCN1791.JPG is now available as Commons:File:Old Mackinac Point Light.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 15:25, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Saginawriverlight.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Saginaw River Rear Range Light USGOV.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 17:08, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Libertybridge.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Libertybridge.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 11:09, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sagelibrary.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Sagelibrary.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 11:18, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use images should be tagged with {{Rfu}} rather than the CSD template. Thanks! BJ^Talk 04:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't say anything about the original rights holder on the page you mention in edit summaries? Hmm, Well it should.

So far no-ones really complained, and in many cases the tagging has served to improve the FUR :)

Rather than citing policy you could resolve the issue by finding the holder and adding it to the FUR concerned? (That said probably so could I :( )

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:52, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Citation Barnstar
		For finding a reference for Steve Yzerman's United States citizenship and refusing to to allow other editors to push their POV, you are hereby awarded this The Citation Barnstar. Thanks! — MrDolomite • Talk 01:10, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you feel the need to tag all the pictures of House characters with deletion tags? There is a difference between a promotional picture of the character an actor plays and the actual person himself. This is clearly explained in all the fair use rationales in this images. Can you please explain this? LonelyMarble (talk) 02:48, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no difference. Asher196 (talk) 02:49, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From WP:NON-FREE "No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose. Where possible, non-free content is transformed into free material instead of using a fair-use defense, or replaced with a freer alternative if one of acceptable quality is available; "acceptable quality" means a quality sufficient to serve the encyclopedic purpose. (As a quick test, before adding non-free content requiring a rationale, ask yourself: "Can this non-free content be replaced by a free version that has the same effect?" and "Could the subject be adequately conveyed by text without using the non-free content at all?" If the answer to either is yes, the non-free content probably does not meet this criterion.)" Asher196 (talk) 02:51, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, a candid picture of an actor is not the same as a promotional picture of a character in a TV show. Look at any major TV show on this encyclopedia and the characters page of most have a fair-use image of the actor playing the character. Why you decided to single out House characters here I don't know but that doesn't matter. I am pretty confident in the fair-use rationale here since it seems to be very widespread, and since I uploaded a couple of the images you tagged I will do nothing more. We will see what happens. LonelyMarble (talk) 02:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The articles you are referring to are in the wrong, and will be dealt with eventually. I just happened to come across the House images after recently going through this with Disney Channel shows, which by the way, all the images were deleted. Asher196 (talk) 03:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If all these images really will be deleted then this is a very large problem because almost every single non-animated television show will have this problem. This is a very big task. I'd like to see if there's ever been some general discussion on this issue. The articles I am referring to are pretty much every single TV show article there is, this seems pretty odd to me. LonelyMarble (talk) 03:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just did a little poking around and found that most of the currently popular television shows have no images at all in the articles. Asher196 (talk) 03:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give some examples? From my experience, most popular shows have at least a portrait of all the characters in the article, which from my perspective seems the same as breaking up each character individually. Would it be better for an article to have one picture with all the characters or a lot of small pictures of each indidividual character? From a fair-use standpoint I don't see why it would make a difference. But also, for most popular TV shows, on the article pages of individual characters, most of them have a fair-use image of the character. Are you suggesting all copyright images of TV show characters be deleted? This seems to me like it would be a very big decision and task. LonelyMarble (talk) 03:33, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I quoted the relevant parts of WP:NON-FREE on your talk page. Essentially, any replaceable non-free image of a living person is not acceptable. Asher196 (talk) 03:37, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an expert on copyright policy or Wikipedia copyright policy. My observations on it just come from what I see. For two quick examples off the top of my head: Lost (TV series) admittedly does not have many images in the main artice but all the articles of Lost characters have a fair-use image in them. The West Wing article has many images in it that are fair use and most or all of the character articles have a fair-use image on it. I just mention these two because they are feautured articles. There's really nothing else to say, the interpretation you give is very debatable, considering these are essentially pictures of fictional characters, not actual living people. This issue is so widespread I don't think a couple speedy deletion notices will solve it, there's not much more to say. LonelyMarble (talk) 03:49, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

←Hi, I have re-tagged all these images as replaceable fair use, which allows another 48 hours from now. In my opinion, they are replaceable because there is no significant difference between these images and any freely available headshot of the actors that could be made in every case. Kevin (talk) 05:38, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your contribution to the page, please keep in mind that the disambiguation page is for subjects that are associated with the same title (ie "Star Trek"), not subjects that happen to have "Star Trek" in the title. The page is not meant to be a glossary. Feel free to contact me if you have any concerns. Just64helpin (talk) 17:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:DISAMBIG#What not to include. Just64helpin (talk) 23:03, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the fair use rationale, hope it's okay now. --Music26/11 18:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the Charlevoix South Pier Light Station it became apparent to me that a "station established" line in the infobox would be a good idea. Maybe you and Berean Hunter can come up with something? 7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:42, 4 September 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Asher -- The infobox should have a space for the U.S.C.G. number. For example, take a look at White Shoal Light (Michigan) and go to the lighthouse digest link, which lists that number. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 22:52, 11 September 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Hi there, the image is currently a GA nominee, so if illustrations are possible they should be used; also, the image you keep removing is an image of the actor in costume, the image in the infobox is an image of the actor in regular life (well, not in costume). Cryer (the actor) his portrayal of Duckie is one of his most famous ones, so an image of Cryer in costume as this character is even more signigicant. Please reply. --Music26/11 14:09, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Going by WP:NON-FREE "For media that involves live actors, do not supply an image of the actor in their role if an appropriate free image of the actor exists on their page (as per WP:BLP and above), if there is little difference in appearance between actor and role. However, if there is a significant difference due to age or makeup and costuming, then, when needed, it may be appropriate to include a non-free image to demonstrate the role of the actor in that media." I think a case could be made either way, but I like to err on the side of caution. I'll leave the image in the article, but I think non-free fair use images are being used far too often. Asher196 (talk) 21:26, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Upon further review, the section I quoted is for list articles, which this isn't. The more appropriate part of the guideline under "Unacceptable" says "Pictures of people still alive, groups still active, and buildings still standing; provided that taking a new free picture as a replacement (which is almost always considered possible) would serve the same encyclopedic purpose as the non-free image. This includes non-free promotional images.

However, for some retired or disbanded groups, or retired individuals whose notability rests in large part on their earlier visual appearance, a new picture may not serve the same purpose as an image taken during their career, in which case the use would be acceptable." Asher196 (talk) 02:59, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You placed a speedy tag on Image:Sarah Palin Time cover.jpg a few minutes ago. Please take a look at the "purpose of use" listed, which specifically addressed wp:nfc i8. I'm working on a short paragraph of the media reaction to her candidacy, which I think will specifically justify the fair use of the Time cover. I was temporarily distracted, but it will be in there shortly.   user:j    (aka justen)   02:24, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I removed the SD tag on the image. Your paragraph should bring the image in line with the guideline. Asher196 (talk) 02:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the second look, Asher. I've added in the content, addressing the media reaction in general and the specific attention from Time (including the events leading up to their placing Palin on the cover). Take care,   user:j    (aka justen)   03:36, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a different (better?) image than the one in the article presently. It is from the National Archives. http://www.footnote.com/image/4290835/ What do you think? 7&6=thirteen (talk) 18:41, 10 September 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Greg "Free Beer" Daniels is a famous Midlander? 7&6=thirteen (talk) 16:17, 11 September 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

I wondered about that also. I didn't look too deeply into it yet. Asher196 (talk) 22:54, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, Barek beat you to it. I had no info, so didn't really want to take uninformed action. I guess that means I would not be a good candidate for a cabinet post in the present White House. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 23:07, 11 September 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

There might be enough material out there to create an article on him that meets WP:BIO - I didn't look closely at the sources. But, until notability can be established (preferably by creating an article for him that meets the requirements of WP:BIO), I went ahead and removed him from the list. If someone feels strongly that he is notable, encourage them to create an article. As it was, the show was demonstrated as notable - but that doesn't automatically equate to the person on the show being notable. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 23:11, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Bay City Mall, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bay City Mall (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 19:18, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Asher196, I'm Burner0718 and I created a wiki for video game reviews. I thought you may be interested. Here's the link. Cheers! Burner0718 ^{Jibba Jabba!} 21:15, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I took so long to get to this, I just happened to check things tonight (don't edit nearly as often as I used to). Any particular reason you reverted me here? I didn't see any real reason given for the revert, and I thought I had made a rather positive edit (removing crufty trivia stuff that was unsourced; save the one bit). Thanks. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 02:49, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I probably thought it was vandalism. I saved the information on the Bridge Walk and the Dirty Jobs info and deleted the rest. Asher196 (talk) 03:33, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, just was curious. Looks like a good end result to me, thanks :) ^demon^{[omg plz]} 14:52, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fashion Square Mall is notable because there are multiple sources about it (or there were, before those two links died). The Saginaw News source there was a definitely non-trivial coverage. I've been unable to find similar sources for Bay City or Midland Malls, and neither has anyone else. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 21:50, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barek, Needs an infobox. ==== Stan

I'm not very familiar with Infobox Island, so I only added the most basic of data in the fields for it. Someone else will need to expand the data. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 00:32, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll pass this on to Asher, as I think he did Granite Island, Michigan 7&6=thirteen (talk) 00:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Asher, Can you help, por favor? Thanks. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 00:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

I filled out the infobox as much as I could. I don't know what more would need to be added. Asher196 (talk) 03:06, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for filling it out. Best to you. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 11:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Long time no see Asher, I hope your projects have been successful. It appears you seem to be having difficulties with this IP, this user has also removed content from the Cassi Davis article which I've warned the operator about multiple times. He's also been editing your legitimate talk page comments regarding you to perhaps utilize some form of obscure humor. I wouldn't call sockpuppet just yet but his mannerisms are similar in almost every aspect to Carmen Tate, the unconstructive IP we ran into last time. No matter if this continues he'll end up in a similar position. Cheers, UniversalBread (talk) 01:43, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Too late, he's received a 24 hour block. UniversalBread (talk) 01:44, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think your suspicions are correct. I'm getting tired of babysitting those Tyler Perry related articles. Asher196 (talk) 01:44, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asher, sorry to hear your travails, but thrilled that you are back and doing better. I missed you and your work. When you pulled your hand out of the bucket, there was a void. Get well and God bless you. Your friend and editorial collaborator, 7&6=thirteen (talk) 23:55, 23 September 2008 (UTC) sTAN[reply]

Thank you. Asher196 (talk) 01:34, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please be aware of policies such as Wikipedia:Manual of Style (titles) before taking away italics. Most entertainment works such as books, movies, and TV shows are put in italics. Thanks. LonelyMarble (talk) 02:13, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, my mistake, sorry. Asher196 (talk) 03:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. And no worries about the images you tagged earlier, I understand what you were doing and that's cool. I got a little defensive because those were the first images I uploaded, but I think it's good there is people making sure Wikipedia is completely free. So happy editing. LonelyMarble (talk) 07:45, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it true? If so, it should be fairly easy to cite. --Dweller (talk) 14:59, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you are asking me. If the IP editor is going to make such claims on a BLP, they better be able to back them up with sources. Asher196 (talk) 16:34, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm asking if any of the comments from the IP are true. I'm an ignorant Limey, so I've never heard of this BOR outside of Wikipedia, so I've no idea. Is there any truth in the accusations (if toned down to remove POV)? If so, they should be easy to verify with RS as the chap seems inherently newsworthy over there. --Dweller (talk) 16:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		Greetings, Asher196. In recognition of your hard work and meticulous craftsmanship in constructing lighthouse articles in Michigan and elsewhere, this award as Keeper of the Light is conferred. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 01:03, 15 October 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Hi, I've noticed you have been deleteing the career, and music career on LaVan Davis. I'm the IP editor who was putting LaVan Davis (Born LaVan Davis). Thanks for showing me that I don't need that. But I'm the one who has also been putting LaVan Davis's Carrer and Music Caeer. I hope it not a problem, but I put that because I tried to expand LaVan Davis. I hope it's okay if you would keep it that way. They can read it on Wikipedia and TBS.com. I hope I'm not causing problems. Thanks for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.215.63.19 (talk) 00:28, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This picture might be a good addition in the Supreme Court section. Wikimedia Commons, bust of Fred M. Vinson. I don't know how to do that. What do you think? 7&6=thirteen (talk) 14:16, 19 October 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Thanks for doing this. And thanks for the instruction. Give a man a fish, etc. I think it looks good, too. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 16:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Asher, Needs this caption: Fred M. Vinson bust, US Supreme Court, Washington, DC, USA. Sculptor Jimilu Mason. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 16:22, 19 October 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Done. Asher196 (talk) 17:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pls have a look at this. Thanks. Docku:“what up?” 01:20, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asher: New article. Needs editing, photos, the usual. Please help. Very rough. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 00:01, 30 October 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

I did some work on the article. More rewriting needs to be done. I'll work more on it tomorrow. Asher196 (talk) 04:57, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning Asher. Thanks. I agree. Looking forward to your improvements. Best to you. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 11:59, 30 October 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

You might want to look at my talk page on this subject. I know you monitor it, but .... Thanks. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 01:11, 31 October 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Thank you. I had noticed some weird comments before, and they (apparently) tied into that semi-hidden link, which I had missed too. Glad to help out. I'll always try to 'protect your back, partner.' 7&6=thirteen (talk) 01:11, 31 October 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Discovered this article, and I've put in the link to it ("aid to navigation") in Spectacle Reef Light. It occurs to me that lighthouse articles generally have that phrase, but that they may not have that link. If you knew someone who had a bot that could do that, it would be a good thing. I don't have any sources on my own. Could you help? I'll also ask Barek, as he might be a source. Thanks. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 10:30, 1 November 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Hi,

I'm not entirely sure I understand your position regarding the home versions of Tekken 6. Do you think they should be addressed in a "port" section (which doesn't exist as of now)? The articles about the other games in the series tend to mention both arcade and home versions in the same infobox, and I'm tempted to point out that lots of video game articles do that as well, when different versions are released...

Is that because the home versions aren't officially titled "Tekken 6" yet (nor "Tekken 6 Bloodline Rebellion", for that matter)? Erigu (talk) 22:05, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm attempting to standardize this article using the guidelines of Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines. The information for the original release of the game is what should be listed in the infobox. Other releases of the game can be put in the main body of the article, in a "Ports" section for example. Asher196 (talk) 22:42, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, could you please explain why I "vandalized" a page? ThanksGeoffreyq (talk) 04:08, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Look you don't have to lock LaVan Davis, I will not edit that page anymore, because looks like I'm causing problems. I was trying to simply expand LaVan Davis. You told me i needed a website for "It frequently mistaken that LaVan Davis is married to actress Cassi Davis in real life, but it is false.^[1] They portray a married couple on Tyler Perry's House of Payne as Curtis Payne and Ella Payne, and a couple in the play Madea Goes to Jail as boyfriend and girlfriend. They can both also be seen on the movie Daddy's Little Girls. Tyler Perry claims they work very well together.^[1]". It can be found on imdb.com on LaVan Davis's page under the trivia section. But I'll never edit LaVan Davis again sorry for causing problems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.215.62.226 (talk) 22:32, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to stop editing, you just need to find a reliable source. Like Wikipedia, Imdb is edited by users, so it isn't considered a WP:Reliable source of information. Asher196 (talk) 02:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I've left a note in the talk page too. Not sure if any other stuff sourced by imbd.com should be removed although some of those have another source and the rest is on birth date and place and filmography. --JForget 00:22, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't mean to keep bothering you but please help me keep the photo that I have on the article LaVan Davis, I really like it. I just want to keep it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cassandra Davis (talk • contribs) 22:32, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just put up an RFC over at the project regarding a problem with the Pop Culture section at Coleco. Wanted to let you know about as well, as your input is appreciated since its always neutral. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 23:23, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, no problem mistakes happen. I knew exactly which game you were talking about. :) ^TH1RT3EN _{talk ♦ contribs} 21:42, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asher, this is coming up on its 50th anniversary -- that doesn't happen very often. I thought it would be nice to be a good DYK. We need another 4000 bytes (because of DYK criteria), which could come (with paraphrase) from some of the articles cited and linked, I think. Think about it. Best regards. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:22, 15 November 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Thanks for noodling on this. Take a look at the Alpena News story. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 21:14, 15 November 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Just put up an RFC over at the project regarding a problem with the dedicated video game consoles template. Wanted to let you know about as well, as again your input is appreciated because of your neutrality. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 05:54, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asher, New article. Infobox (at least) could use a picture, etc. Take a look at Detroit Free Press or Detroit News. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 13:43, 16 November 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Hi there! Don't mean to bother you, but I noticed that you have been reverting the introduction of the Nala.jpg in the article and would like to invite you to come discuss your reasoning so that we can put all of this to an end and I can finally nominate the article for GA. Thanks! – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 21:03, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asher, Happy New Year. I think that a related material for the Navbox could be List of lifesaving stations in Michigan. What do you think? 7&6=thirteen (talk) 18:04, 31 December 2008 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Under a concerted attack. Needs to be protected. I can't keep up with the three of them. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 04:22, 15 February 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

A really good picture has been added. But we need to make it fit better. Any thoughts? I don't want to get rid of the picture, and I don't want to discourage the newbie. Maybe if it or other stuff was moved? Or resized? Please help. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 22:21, 1 March 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Have Black & Tan (Guiness and Harp (although they are owned ironically by South African Brewing Company). Enjoy the day. Best regards to you. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 16:11, 17 March 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

I would like to know if you could help contribute to Thumb Radio, which has recently been nominated for deletion. Since you have contributed to a radio station in the Thumb area of Michigan, your knowledge is needed. I created the page about the uniqueness of radio stations in the thumb area. Please take a minute to edit this one of a kind page.Cgord (talk) 19:46, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Post your comment about thumb radio Cgord (talk) 20:42, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Asher, I've more or less finished several of the northern Lake Michigan, Straits of Mackinac and nother Lake Huron lighthouse articles. If you would take a look and put on your final touches and blessing, it would be appreciated. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 21:18, 14 September 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Asher, More or less done. Please take a look. Thanks. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 13:30, 7 October 2009 (UTC) Stan[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of gangs active in the midwest United States. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of gangs active in the midwest United States. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:57, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Asher,

A heads up. Someone is systematically nominating the source lists for lighthouses for deletion. Discussion is here.

IMHO, this is wrong-headed, and anybody who would help in opposing this would be apprecaied. Obvioiusly, I wouldlike to keep the Lighthouse resources and I replied to all of them like this>

• Strong Keep These are useful and important lists of sources. There was a lot off work that went into these lists, and they are not miscellaneous lists of books, but are a considered and well researched compendium of resources, including links. For anybody who is seriously researching lighthouses in the United States and the affected areas, this are very useful. For anybody to argue that lists should be deleted without regard to their utility is to disregard the needs of our readers and potential readers. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:43, 3 April 2010 (UTC) Stan[reply]

I agree that the links are very useful, but they also seem to violate WP:EL, so no matter what my opinion is at the discussion, they are most likely going to be deleted. The best advice I can give you comes from WP:EL..."The subject of this guideline is external links that are not citations to sources supporting article content. If the website or page to which you want to link includes information that is not yet a part of the article, consider using it as a source for the article, and citing it. Guidelines for sourcing, which includes external links used as citations, are discussed at Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Citing sources." Asher196 (talk) 01:32, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. The links provide tremendously good context at least for the articles. These are not 'spammy' sites or books. The people who are criticizing this don't edit lighthouse articles, don't know much about the subject, and apparently don't care if anyone else does, either. The sheer number of lighthouse articles (now or potentially) that could benefit from this is huge. Wikipedia is one of those places in the world where they will pull out the eye of the world because its policy, and then say they have found the cure for blindness. I don't have to be part of the operating team, and this will help cure my addiction. Best regards. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 01:51, 5 April 2010 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Galaga_3_marquee.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Melesse (talk) 21:16, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a new article. Please take a look and make some improvements. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 12:37, 4 May 2010 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Are you suggesting that this article is written exclusively in American English? I count the British spelling of "behaviour" three times in this entry. That's just for starters. Hairhorn (talk) 18:15, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page...Asher196 (talk) 19:10, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for joining the chorus. Haven't run across many edits, although maybe it's just I've been out of town a lot. Best to you. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 17:43, 27 May 2010 (UTC) Stab[reply]

While your at it. please take a look. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 17:45, 27 May 2010 (UTC) Stan[reply]

I noticed your out there. Thanks. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 23:16, 13 June 2010 (UTC) Stan[reply]

That's a quote from a printed biography. It was put there by the editor who created the article (who is related to him, and has it. I got involved with this article at his request, after I happened to meet him. He is an academic, and this was an opportunity for him to get involved in Wikipedia and have a positive experience. He has written to me that he is pleased with this experience. Thanks for your help. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 00:48, 14 June 2010 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Please don't get into a war. "This is an encyclopedia, not a magazine article. Also, you can't reprint entire sections ofnewspaper articles and put it in quotes just because you listed the source" If you don't think content has been properly presented, edit it, don't just delete it. This kind of Destructive editing wont take us anywhere. SuchiBhasin (talk) 14:24, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did edit it. I removed the material that didn't belong. Asher196 (talk) 14:27, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well in my part of the world it called deleting, but if you still insist on calling it editing, I would prefer the term Destructive editing. I thought your problem was that it was a lot of referenced text! ("entire sections ofnewspaper articles"), and can you please tell me on what basis are you now saying it does not belong? SuchiBhasin (talk) 14:41, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 04:54, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for keeping an eye on it. In case you weren't aware, the guidelines for business naming that the anonymous IP keeps ignoring are at WP:NCCORP and specifically "If the legal status is used to disambiguate, it should be included in the article title based on the specific preference for the abbreviated or unabbreviated form as prefered by the company (such as with Caterpillar Inc. compared to Mars, Incorporated). Likewise, whether or not to include a comma prior to the legal status should be governed by company usage (see, for example, Nike, Inc. compared to Apple Inc.)." I already provided him with the actual usage with the "," on his talk page and he's still ignoring it. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 15:37, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"unsourced speculation" - I resent that. Far as I recall, it was sourced speculation! :) (No, I did not revert. After all, it is just a speculation). Regards, --G-41614 (talk) 12:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No complaints from me. One of the sources mentions the possibility, far as I recall. could be wrong, though, and I'm not going to see into it right now. Regards, --G-41614 (talk) 12:09, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article is the subject of a Procrustean WP:Deletionist attack. I could use allies. Thank you. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 19:54, 15 July 2010 (UTC) Stan[reply]

Asher196, please don't blindly edit-war on behalf of other editors. There is a lengthy discussion on the article Talk: page, to which you have not contributed at all. Please recognize that you can be blocked for edit-warring, even if you haven't technically violated WP:3RR. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:36, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't call restoring the deletion of well sourced material "edit warring".Asher196 (talk) 13:31, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm here to ask you about this edit you made to the page List of common misconceptions. After I've read your edit summary, I thought, "what if someone is feeling cold and they turn on the fan, would they feel cold as well?" According to you, they should not, because they're not sweating, because there's nothing to evaporate – "Fans make the air more comfortable for two reasons: (1) by moving the air, they blow away body heat and evaporate sweat, cooling the body [...]" This explanation is different from the you removed. Please respond to my on my talk page. Sp33dyphil ^{(Talk) (Contributions)(I love Wikipedia!)} 23:43, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment at Talk:SNES#Yet another wording dispute. Anomie⚔ 22:09, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article List of common misconceptions is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of common misconceptions (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Qwyrxian (talk) 08:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain the source of the image Edmund Fitzgerald Lifeboat? The Wikipedia Commons file credits you as the author? Clarification is needed for the license of this image for use on the SS Edmund Fitzgerald article before nominating it as a featured article. If I don't hear back from you, I can replace it with another image. Thank you in advance for any assistance you can provide.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 15:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am the author of the image. I'm not sure what clarification is needed. Asher196 (talk) 16:46, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is the link to the source. See the comment on Wikipedia:Peer review/SS Edmund Fitzgerald/archive1 toward the bottom of the page.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 16:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for promptly fixing the problem.--Wpwatchdog (talk) 17:43, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I noticed that you attempted to file a deletion discussion (on the article Hy-Gain) but did not complete the process. Please note that, when listing an article for deletion, a discussion page needs to be made for other users to discuss whether to keep or delete the article. This is typically done by following the steps listed here. Note that if you are editing as an unregistered user, you cannot create a discussion page. Please consider registering an account or asking another user to help you complete the process at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion. Thank you. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 20:08, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

a special Wikicookies

for Asher196 from helping a new user. Merci Beaucoup --Geneviève (talk) 16:44, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome!--Asher196 (talk) 16:47, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank so much for your correction in the draft of the Coupe Dodge. I wish you a good weekend with your family. Merci beaucoup de votre aide. Je vous souhaite un bon week-end avec votre famille, --Geneviève (talk) 21:47, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look at it as I have time. I've put it on my watchlist. But I can't make any promises. It's about all I can keep up with to try to keep the crap out of the misconceptions page. But good work, and good luck. Cresix (talk) 17:14, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure why you undid the redirect. I KNOW that Pacific Century Motors (PCM) isn't Nexteer Automotive. I just did know if there was enough out there for Pacific Century Motors to have its own article. Thus I made the section in Nexteer for its parent company. There isn't much to PCM existance except for owning Nexteer. Your PCM article total disconnects it from Nexteer and the additional information available in the Nexteer article about a newer 51% owner of PCM. --Spshu (talk) 20:18, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, I see you reverted my restoration of the county/state maps for a handful of Michigan cities. You were responsible for their original replacement, as well. Can you explain why we should prefer the pushpin maps? And why just for eight Michigan cities? Thanks. Two Hearted River (paddle / fish) 02:26, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The pushpin maps provide some of the surrounding area to maybe provide more information to someone unfamiliar with the area.--Asher196 (talk) 01:01, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not worth a dispute. Feel free to restore it. Thanks. Cresix (talk) 00:40, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, I never thought you were trying to start a dispute. I guess what I meant was, it's not really important as far as I'm concerned. Thanks for your messages. Cresix (talk) 01:37, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't carry through with this.[1] Wikipedia's editing policy says that you should try to fix problems if you can and that you shouldn't carry out major changes without reaching consensus on the article talk page. See WP:PRESERVE and WP:PRESERVE#Be_cautious_with_major_changes:_discuss.

On the talk page, I offered the following compromise:

"How about we split the article into sections, and have an editor volunteer to add one cite a day to their assigned section until the entire article is sourced? I'll volunteer for the Arts and entertainment. Who else wants to volunteer?"[2]

I think that's more than reasonable. Will you please pick a section and fix it? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 22:14, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Asher196, I spent about 14 hours yesterday turning the pentagram map wikipedia page into a useful, up=to-date, scholarly, and well-referenced document. I am the originator of this mathematical object and a leading authority on it.

The pictures I put in the page are my own. I created them myself and uploaded them myself. You have removed these pictures from the website, making the text essentially useless, or at least greatly dimishing its expository value.

I don't even know the exact names of the pictures I used, because I uploaded muliple copies (e.g. penta5.svg, penta6.svg,..) and can't remember which ones I settled on.

In order to save me a huge amount of additional time, can you please, please undo your edits? I am having trouble doing this. If you undo the edits, I will promptly add licenses to the pictures. Otherwise, I am stuck. I have to say that this experience makes me reluctant to edit wikipedia pages in the future. RichardEvanSchwartz (talk) 15:05, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please see User talk:RichardEvanSchwartz 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:27, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By the time I got back to looking at this he had already added licenses to the images.--Asher196 (talk) 16:46, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Just trying to facilitate this. I would hate to lose a good and dedicated editor right out of the box. Recruitment and retention is not just a problem for the U.S. military. Best regards. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:59, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, your name came up User talk:RA0808 and User talk:RichardEvanSchwartz. I think there was a failure to communicate. It would be ashame to lose this erstwhile editor. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:09, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, where was the discussion to change the name from Video arcade to Amusement arcade? Seems like there should have been something on the talk page.--Asher196 (talk) 14:04, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article is about amusement arcades so it made sense to give it that name - I didn't think the move would be contentious so there was no discussion. Do you feel that the previous name was more accurate? SilkTork *^{Tea time} 14:11, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Re: Sean Hannity importance rating: Just a reminder that it's best not to revert other editors acting in good faith. While 3 reverts in 24 hours is the normal limit, editors have been blocked for less. Please consider using WP:BRD instead.   Will Beback  talk  02:02, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your assessment 100%, but the user in question was doing neither of those tasks. The edit he was reverting was made to remove erroneous material, as was made clear in the edit summary. Anyone can edit a typo or undo a page blanking, or something like that. Anyone also has a right to raise a concern, but instead of further inquiring on my or the article's talk page, he reverted the edit with a sarcastic edit summary. The real arrogance is when a person continually and forcefully asserts knowledge enough of a subject to make a call on the accuracy of material when they really have no clue. Indrian (talk) 14:04, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why you reverted the inscription of the french interwiki link for Jean Enjalran in this article (and doing so without explanation was even more confusing). The model link-interwiki exist to propose a way for the reader to get some information on a subject in a langage where information exist. It also serve as a way for the future writer of the article on the subject to get some information that he can translate or to get reference. ChristianT (talk) 12:37, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page.--Asher196 (talk) 15:05, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If I change the Stacker page back to include my link - please leave it alone. You can contact LAI Games if you wish, but my online version is endorsed by them and an official flash copy. 107.2.229.199 (talk) 02:32, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Happy new year, my best wishes of health and happiness for year 2012. Je vous offre mes meilleurs vœux de santé et de bonheur pour l'année 2012, ושל אושר לשנה 2012. --Cordialement féministe ♀ Cordially feminist Geneviève (talk) 10:01, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TVPLOT says we can use the episode as a primary source for plot. This is how all articles about TV shows, films, books, etc work. I grant you the plots could do with trimming, but your complete removal of them is nothing more than vandalism. -mattbuck (Talk) 05:11, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]