User talk:Seth Ilys/Archive:2004-Fall

Come join the AIW

You are currently listed as an honorary member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians. We encourage you to become a full-fledged member, by listing yourself as such on the AIW page. Posiduck 04:33, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Copyright

Isn't there a specific template for government documents, other than Template:pd? ugen64 01:38, Oct 30, 2004 (UTC)

No problem. Nice find on those images, btw. ugen64 01:46, Oct 30, 2004 (UTC)

Osama Bin Laden tape

Congratulations on being the one to start the article on the new Bin Laden tape! That was a sharp move ther, Seth. Wiwaxia 00:18, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Gonzales

Thanks for pouncing on Alberto R. Gonzales! Gwimpey 19:00, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)

Keeping "In the news" NPOV and credible

Following various attempts to add partisan and fringe stories to Template:In the news, I've proposed a new criterion to keep such stuff out. Could you please take a look at Wikipedia talk:In the news section on the Main Page and let me know what you think? -- ChrisO 19:15, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

NC election figures

How old are our election figures 4 SPI and Ag Secy? Our figures currently have a margin of 3800 (or so) in the Ag Secy race. According to the SBOE websire the margin is less than 2800 votes. - iHoshie 00:42, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Copyright

Your copyright section on your user page mentions various dual licensing that you allow for your contributions. Could you use the appropriate templates on your user page so we can track the changes? i.e. {{MultiLicensePD}} and one of {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA}}, {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-2.0}}, or {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}. (See: Licensing Templates). I really should have mentioned that your work on the dot project is amazing. Its one of the single best additions to the U.S. city articles that one could think of! Partially for that reason and since all of the rambot articles are multi-licensed, we also wanted your work to be multi-licenced. Thanks! -- Ram-Man 02:30, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)

Your User:Sethbot page does not list your copyright/licensing info. I am assume that it is the same as your regular user account, but it would be best if it was spelled out explicitly. -- Ram-Man 21:00, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)

I don't know if I've ever talked to you about this, but the source county images for the dot-project have all been multi-licensed by James F. and Wapcaplet into the CC-by, which is apparently one-way compatible with the CC-by-sa. I've already asked Bumm13 to multi-license his dot-project images under this license as well, and I plan to ask the others. Would you be agreeable to doing this as well? I know you already multi-license your contributions. I will use the rambot to update the copyright tags in the same way that it updated the tags in the source county images. Thanks! – Ram-Man ^{(comment) (talk)}[[]] 21:27, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

NC Council of State results, part II

Seth,

I just wanted to give a heads up that the SBOE has finalized all of the results minus Ag and SPI. I've updated each the article. I feel we might need divine intervention to solve the Ag and SPI races. :)

Hoshie 00:30, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Happy birthday, Seth! Best wishes. --Whosyourjudas (talk) 03:07, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

(sarcastic) Thanks for telling me.

You know, it would have been a little kind if you at least would have told me that you turned Merit badge into a redirect page. Hoekenheef 07:32, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Dot Project - Arkansas

Hi, Seth. I've still got a way to go with Kansas, but I'll commit to Arkansas next. After that, I might be burnt out. We'll see.

Happy birthday, by the way! Catbar (Brian Rock) 02:49, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Some new Chemistry pages

Hello Seth, I picked on you as you seem to have some interest in Chemistry.

There are some new chemistry pages that seem to me to be totally useless - e.g. Diatomic molecules and List of Polyatomic Ions both by the same person.

Do you think they should be VfD? Jeff Knaggs 16:36, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The Humungous Image Tagging Project

Hi. You've helped with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiki Syntax, so I thought it worth alerting you to the latest and greatest of Wikipedia fixing project, User:Yann/Untagged Images, which is seeking to put copyright tags on all of the untagged images. There are probably, oh, thirty thousand or so to do (he said, reaching into the air for a large figure). But hey: they're images ... you'll get to see lots of random pretty pictures. That must be better than looking for at at and the the, non? You know you'll love it. best wishes --Tagishsimon (talk)

Picasso image

Hi, I started reviewing some of the image tags lately, because it seems some public domain tags are attached inappropriately. I just made a change in Image:BoyWithAPipe.JPG, tagged as PD-art but now as PD-art-US. Picasso's paintings are still under copyright protection in some jurisdictions because he died less than 70 years ago, and there have been copyright infringement lawsuits. But I am aware that some works could independetly be released into public domain by the artist. So if I was wrong and that particular image was really in public domain worldwide, I have to apologize for my hasty change. But if you are not sure, I think it is better to use PD-art-US tag. Just letting you know. Thanks, Tomos 11:16, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)