Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 70.114.38.167 (talk) at 07:07, 17 February 2008 (→hi: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives
User talk:Zscout370/Archive 1 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 2 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 3 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 4 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 5 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 6 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 7 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 8 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 9 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 10

Duplicate Image:Symbol of Ibraki Prefecture.svg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Symbol of Ibraki Prefecture.svg, by another Misplaced Pages user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Symbol of Ibraki Prefecture.svg is a duplicate of an already existing article, category or image.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Symbol of Ibraki Prefecture.svg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 11:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Looks like I cannot spell. User:Zscout370 15:28, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Facarticle

A tag has been placed on Template:Facarticle requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:56, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Already gone. User:Zscout370 05:35, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

re:Japanese flags

My recent edits on Japanese flags began just because I saw lots of "sin bandera" on the list and I thought it's ugly. But I confess I've been a long time flag-fan, visiting flag-related websites frequently. I liked flags from my childhood, but my interests really grew when ex-Soviet nations adopted new flags around 1992. As for JIS Z 8721, I (carelessly) presume it to be same as Munsell, and use the software 色出し名人 (Irodashi Meijin) to get corresponding RGB. To me, it becomes more troubling when a regional govt states the color in Pantone, DIC, or worse yet, does not. (Happens very often for Japanese subnational flags: they exist, but only on de facto usages without written announcements.) Kzaral (talk) 04:31, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I added some construction sheet URLs for your list. (Some prefectural databases do not arrow direct links, so you have to log in at the indexes.) I hope it helps. As for Nagano Prefecture, my software says its color (10R 6 14) is equivalent to RGB 247 96 49, web #f76031. This relatively reliable website uses similar color, though not exactly the same. Kzaral (talk) 01:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch. I will change the Nagano-ken flag later, unless you want to do it for me. I used Inkscape to craft the images, so if you also have it, it will be easy to change. I will book mark that link and see what else we can do in the future. User:Zscout370 07:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I added web colors converted from Munsell on your list, excluding something obvious like #ffffff. It seems Gunma and Miyazaki use a different scheme (presumably something called PCCS), which I could't convert. Kzaral (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 07:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:BLR NOC logo.png

Thanks for uploading Image:BLR NOC logo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Belarus

My I ask - what is your motivation to support the Belarus ąuthoritarian government? Xx236 (talk) 11:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd encourage zscout to ignore stupid conspiracy theories about established editors having a secret agenda. I'd also reassure him that picking on the article of the day on the article's talk page is common for people who wouldn't do any useful editing themselves. 70.64.77.186 (talk) 00:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I didn't chose when the article was going to go on the main page, that would be Raul654's decision. But I do find Belarus to be an interesting country, so that is why I write about it. It will be useless for me to talk about how bad article quality is and not do anything about it. User:Zscout370 04:07, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Template talk:Country data Croatia

How would this issue be resolved? -- Imbris (talk) 21:45, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't see it as an issue that needs to be resolved. User:Zscout370 21:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Then a question perhaps?! -- Imbris (talk) 21:56, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

? User:Zscout370 21:56, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Well why not tackle that suggestion of mine. -- Imbris (talk) 22:18, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

There is no pressing issue to make the change. There is no one demanding to have the icons changed other than you. User:Zscout370 22:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't know exactly who has written on commons Image:Flag of Croatia.svg that there is a need of using 2:3 ratio version for icons. I only know that this is written on that page, some of commons users listened to that pleading and use 2:3 for their icons. -- Imbris (talk) 22:23, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I can check the history, but honestly, I still see no need to do what the Commons asked. User:Zscout370 22:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Well you said that it is only me who is suggesting that. I have checked. It was firstly proposed by commons:User:Neoneo13 on 20 of June 2006. -- Imbris (talk) 22:36, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

There is still no pressing need. User:Zscout370 22:40, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

What does that mean anyway? There is always some need, pressing or not. The image of Croatia may be more complete (on Wiki) if her symbols would be more readable. -- Imbris (talk) 22:46, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

It is fine the way that it is now. User:Zscout370 22:58, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

This is your final oppinion. Maybe if Neoneo13 and I waited for a couple of months (maybe another 2 years should pass - like from the first proposal by coleauge Neoneo13). Why is this so difficult. Unlock and I'll do it. Or we may as well give up (for now) and wait a few days to cool-off. -- Imbris (talk) 00:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I cannot unlock, it is a High Use Template and those are always locked. Honestly, I feel like this is an issue that never was an issue. It is fine the way it is, just trust me dammit. User:Zscout370 06:45, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

hi

Can a cool admin help a guy out? I want to add one sentence to the world of Misplaced Pages. But I can't. The sentence is factual, provable, reliable (I chose the New York Times version.)

Circumcision may decrease a man's risk of getting HIV but it may also INCREASE a man's risk of getting herpes and chlamydia. (and some doctors even say other STD's too but I won't get into that and I wouldn't put caps on INCREASE.)

The article on circumcision mentions the term HIV probably 100 times (I'm not joking) and mentions "herpes" or "chlamydia" not Once. Click on the article. You tell me if it's an article on the procedure or a pro-circumcision propaganda pamphlet.

Can a cool admin stop two guys named Avraham and Jakew (the site's dictators) from deleting my one sentence I want to add? Or possibly get new Admins to take over this article, which has fallen way below Misplaced Pages standards. And if people's edits are automatically deleted, people won't want to get a user name and contribute in the future.

here's the New York Times piece... http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9C07E4D91F3AF931A35757C0A961958260&fta=y

I used to love Misplaced Pages until I went to add a sentence, you know? Well, thanks. 70.114.38.167 (talk) 07:07, 17 February 2008 (UTC)