User talk:Conch Shell

Welcome to the Wikipedia

Here are some links I thought useful:

Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. Wikipedia:About, Wikipedia:Help desk, and Wikipedia:Village pump are also a place to go for answers to general questions. To read up on the latest wikinews, have a look at the Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost.

You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

(Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 13:44, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

IMDB links

Please don't link individual titles to IMDB, but link to a wikipedia article. Like on Winona Ryder.

Keep IMDB links to the WP article about the movie. Cburnett 18:41, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

sorry but this time I made sure I only replaced the brown links that weren't working, I just thought they'd be better than the 'This page does not exist yet message'. Just out of interest is there any particular reason why people shouldn't do this?

NOTE: please sign your posts with ~~~~

External links should be used sparingly; the primary means to link is the standard wiki link. IMDB links should only be on the articles about them.

If you link something externally to replace a red link, then if the article is created later then the link still links externally. External links are substitutions for internal links when an article doesn't exist. It's also possible to determine how many articles link to a non-existant article. Cburnett 19:17, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Gospel and its precursors

Thanks for the contribution. I hope we can develop this subject further. — Italo Svevo 19:03, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I did a Google search and found quite a lot of material on the matter but I kept the section to a minimum as it's a controversial topic and I didn't want to violate the Wikipedia NPOV. Hopefully people who know more about the subject than me will be able to expand it. Conch Shell 14:34, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image:Winona ryder.jpg

Thanks for uploading this picture. However, would you please add the source (URL where you got the image from) to the image description page? Thank you. Lupo 10:02, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

RE: Shahak Worshiping Allegations

I would very much appreciate if you could enlighten me as to your motives.

Denis Diderot 16:32, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The idea of an encyclopedia is to provide information in an objective format. Jayjg has included links to Werner Cohn's webpage from the Israel Shahak page and the Jewish History, Jewish Religion page. Werner Cohn's webpage contains a misleading copyedit. People should be made aware of this or the link should be removed, otherwise Wikipedia is being used to promote a non-NPOV Conch Shell 08:33, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Tatra-t97-small.JPG

Hi, where do this photo come from? Who has decided it is public domain? Regards, Thuresson 18:38, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I found the photo by doing a Google image search for "Tatra T97". I've just tried to find the exact photo again but I can't so I've changed its copyright tag to "Fairold" which is probably more acceptable.

Conch Shell 08:50, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Image:Winona ryder.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Winona ryder.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —MetsBot 19:06, 9 December 2006 (UTC) Thuresson 01:38, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Same material twice: Israel Shahak

Hi, I´m sending a note to you as I see you have edited Israel Shahak and his book Jewish History, Jewish Religion. My question is: why is there partly exactly the same text in both articles? About 1/3 of the Jewish History, Jewish Religion is also in Israel Shahak. And; NB: it is the critical part. Now, this suprises me, as I have met some of the same editors on other articles relating to Israel/Palestine, and then the argument has been that the same info. should not be in two places. (I guess I should inform you: the info. was critical of Israel). Why not remove "one copy": say: rm everything except the ADL statement/link from Shahak-page, and vice verca on the book-page? Huldra 03:59, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the duplication is messy. I created the Jewish History, Jewish Religion page and Jayjg added the same criticisms to it as the ones on the Israel Shahak page. I then countered these on both pages. You're quite welcome to clean-up these pages (that's what Wikipedia is all about!) but please could you maintain their balance? Thanks. Conch Shell 08:26, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I have blocked out (in the manner outlined above) inf. given twice. There is still one sentence left (given twice): that is the sentence about "fabricating incidents" etc. I´ll have to check the ref. more to know where (in which article) to block that sentence. I´m not sure if I understand your "maintain their balance"? Between the two articles? Huldra 16:09, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

By "maintain their balance" I meant between those who argue that Shahak's views are anti-Semitic and those who argue they aren't. Unfortunately this is lost by removing one set of arguments from the page. I'll see if I can reword these so the text isn't identical on both. Conch Shell 08:32, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Classic Rock

Hello. I was wondering if you would like to participate in my classic rock survey. I'm trying to find the most like classic rock song. There is more information on my user page. Hope you participate! RENTASTRAWBERRY ^{FOR LET?} röck 02:04, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Done Conch Shell 09:02, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Terrorism and Baroukh Goldshteyn (its Hebrew and Yiddish, why not spell it like that?)

I have read and re-read what Wikipedia considers as terrorism and cannot find the obvious evidence you seem to find in order to classify Goldshteyn as a terrorist. In fact, you were debating days ago on the very fact that according to you any statement on his motive is an unauthorative claim. Now you are the one claiming you know his motive. Clearly, Goldshteyn does not fit properly into what Wikipedia calls a terrorist. Now with your own POV, it may well fit but that is not the point that Wikipedia should make. Concerning "his government", Israel spoke clearly of Nathan Zaeda as a terrorist (through the clumsy statement of Sharon) but never did officially concerning Goldshteyn (only some spokespeople of denominations of Judaism). What do you know really of the whole subject? You read hebrew? Where you in Israel when all this happened? ... You may have to take this to arbitration. hasofer 22:20, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let us hope that this nonsense is over, thanks to Aiden. No arbitration then? hasofer 00:49, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not even... Is Zero0000 a friend of yours? hasofer 03:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is the English language version of Wikipedia so I've used the English spelling of Goldstein's name.
The Israeli government demolished a shrine at Goldstein's tomb under a law forbidding the erection of monuments to terrorists. They therefore consider him to be one.
Wikipedia discourages the use of the word 'terrorist' but they have a terrorists category. Perhaps it's best if the category is just removed?

Conch Shell 11:03, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your question, like many categories it's a hopelessly POV mess. For every Baruch Goldstein you'd like to add, there are many who would equally like to add Yasser Arafat, George W. Bush, Fidel Castro, etc. Ideally a more objective definition could be use; the sub-category "People convicted of terrorism" is a good start. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:32, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Translating Göring

Hello. I was interested in your Göring article, and indeed was not aware of the infamous Nazi's brother. I would like to translate this page for the French Wikipédia. However I am new here on Wiki, so I am not sure: is it OK to simply translate a page from one language to another? Thanks for the info. Syrius 17:09, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I assume it is, you rewritting the page in French would be no different from me rewritting information from the original sources in my own words. However it might be best to check with an administrator (eg Sam Spade) first. Conch Shell 10:18, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thanks a lot for the quick response. All the best. Syrius 08:53, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:47828.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:47828.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:56, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Favorite Songs

My survey has changed. I am now continuing my mission for the best songs, but now I am accepting all genres. I'm giving you a chance to revote for your top ten favorite songs of any genres (not just classic rock which is still the best). I've made a executive decision to keep the existing survey results and just add on to that with the new entries. My feeling for doing this is because classic rock is the most influential genre in music currently so it should be expressed more in the survey. Thank you for contributing in the past, and hopefully in the future. ROCK ON. RENTASTRAWBERRY ^{FOR LET?} röck 03:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In danger of 3RR violation on Israel Shahak

Hello Conch Shell, I should notify you that you are in danger if violating the 3RR rule on Israel Shahak, if you revert again you could be blocked from editing wikipedia.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 09:34, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - so are you. Conch Shell 08:23, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your complaint about User:Jayjg

I've removed your complaint about Jayjg from User talk:Jimbo Wales because you don't seem to have made any meaningful attempt to Resolving disputes|resolve this dispute. [1]. Please give that a go before complaining to Jimbo, who I'm sure you realise is very, very busy and cannot intervene in all disputes. --Tony Sidaway 18:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:47828.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:47828.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jkelly 21:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Israel Shahak

Conch Shell,

Helping hands are always needed in Wikipedia. Your assistance in the Israel Shahak article would be much appreciated. :) Itayb 22:18, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Tatra-t97.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tatra-t97.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 03:36, 19 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 03:36, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Albertgoering.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Albertgoering.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Epenstein.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Epenstein.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:20, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Shahak.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Shahak.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 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 03:46, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Tatra-t97-small.JPG

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Tatra-t97-small.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 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 04:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]