text:
User talk:Aaron charles

Welcome to WP:UNI!!!
 Hi, and welcome to WikiProject Universities! Our goals are to standardize the structure and content of all college and university articles, improve Wikipedia's coverage of these articles (hopefully propelling them to featured article status), and serve as the central resource for all discussions and information related to colleges and universities on Wikipedia.

A few features that you might find helpful:

 * Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
 * The university infobox is one way we hope to standardize our coverage of university articles. All university pages should have this infobox, and relevant fields should be filled in and sourced.
 * Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you [ watchlist it].
 * The project has a few expanding departments, which handle article quality assessment, member recruitment and project awareness and article improvement collaborations.
 * We have a Student Affairs task force that focuses on Student affairs-specific articles.
 * We've developed a variety of guidelines for article structure and content, template use, categorization, and other issues that you may find useful.
 * Check out our to do list to get started!

If you have any questions please don't hesitate to ask one of the project participants or post a question on the talk page. We'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! — Noetic  Sage  02:51, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Acadiana
Aaron Charles, I concur with you completely that "Acadiana" should not have been changed to "Cajun Country"; I believe the change is unwarranted. Is there anything I can do to help? (I already voiced my opposition to the change on the talk page for "Acadiana," and I put in a word of support on "Requested moves" page, where your request seems to be in limbo at present for some reason.

I think a good compromise is to have "Acadiana (or Cajun Country)" in the introductory sentence, and to have "Cajun Country" redirect to "Acadiana" (not the other way around.)

As I point out, "Acadiana" is the official name of the region per concurrent resolution of the Louisiana State Legislature; whereas "Cajun Country" is just sort of a loosely applied, almost slangish term that smacks of being a cliché. One might as well replace "Mississippi" with "God's Country" or "Frank Sinatra" with "Ol' Blue Eyes." Sincerely, --Skb8721 (talk) 20:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

P.S. I notice NDGP, who changed "Acadiana" to "Cajun Country," has been a Wikipedian for less than a year, and, if I read his page correctly, he has spent little more than a week in Louisiana. I find it rather presumptious of him to swoop in and make such a drastic change -- a change the site warns against when one is about to rename a page. I resent the fact the we must now "discuss" something that, to me, is self-evident (that "Acadiana" should be the true title of the page) and something that should not have been tinkered with in the first place. --Skb8721 (talk) 20:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
 * >to fix the erronous reference on their website that says Acadiana has 8 parishes
 * Yes, I've seen that error elsewhere; I think they mean the "Cajun Heartland" region, which is different than "Acadiana." --Skb8721 (talk) 18:36, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
 * P.S. So what's next?  I tried to fix the matter on my own, but I'm unable to do so.  --Skb8721 (talk) 18:39, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Encyclopedia of Cajun Culture
Aaron Charles. . . FYI, I've discontinued my personal web site, The Encyclopedia of Cajun Culture, because it had just become way too obsolete, partly because of Wikipedia.

As such, I've asked Wikipedia to create an AWB (AutoWikiBrowser) to find and delete all references to The Encyclopedia of Cajun Culture, its URL www.cajunculture.com, any combination of the two, etc. (I still use the domain, but now I use it solely for promoting my books -- by the way, note my new book, a young reader's history of the Cajuns.)  Sincerely, --Skb8721 (talk) 01:23, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

May 2008
Hi there, the recent deletion you made to Southwest Louisiana has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. -- Ndgp (talk) 21:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Issuecheck (talk) 01:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

 * POV question now added to the article. Thanks. Aaron charles (talk) 03:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

LSU System Template
You removed the Louisiana State University Agricultural Center from Template:Public universities and colleges in Louisiana and rightfully so. However, we just found this uncategorized, unlinked article and it is very difficult to even know it exists. Can you place it in a proper LSU template or create one for the LSU System? --Jh12 (talk) 20:53, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking, although I guess there really isn't a lot to link to it in the first place. Best, --Jh12 (talk) 14:11, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Bonjour! How do you do citations for material in articles? Merci, RCB Rain City Blues (talk) 00:08, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Hurricane Katrina newsmakers
Category:Hurricane Katrina newsmakers, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Cgingold (talk) 03:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Louisiana Place Names in French?
Aaron Charles,

I see that a user named Nintala has gone through and rendered many Louisiana place names in French. For example, Avery Island is now parenthetically referred to as Île d'Avery. There is no harm in this, except it seems to me that someone is using Wikipedia to advance their own linguistic activism. I mean, why not render Louisiana place names in Spanish, too? Where does one stop? Furthermore, I don't know any local French speakers who call Avery Island "Île d'Avery" -- rather, they call it in French "La Saline" or they just interject the usual English expression into their French. What to do? --Skb8721 (talk) 16:13, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. How do we remove the French translations without starting an editing war?  Should we involve a 3rd, neutral party somehow?
 * I'm a member of CODOFIL, my daughter is in French Immersion, and I oppose "English Only" measures, but I don't support the translation of Louisiana placenames into French on Wikipedia because it simply doesn't reflect reality, as per the Avery Island translation example.
 * This reminds me of a trilingual street sign in New Iberia, where downtown street names are rendered in English, French, and Spanish. The sign for "French Street" is translated as "Rue Francaise" and "Calle Francesa" -- but French Street in New Iberia was named for the French family, so the correct translation should have been "Rue French" and "Calle French".  The intention was good, but the results were misleading.  --Skb8721 (talk) 18:13, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Aaron Charles, I see you added a note to Nintala's page; I have now done likewise, noting that literal translation of placenames can merely lead to trouble, and using Avery Island as an example of how the matter is more complicated than it may seem. But, now, do we undo what Nintala has done?  --Skb8721 (talk) 18:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I see that I have caused much more trouble than I had intended. I am in full support for CODOFIL and any aims to increase the visual presence, auditory presence, and de facto and de jure presence of the French language as it pertains to Louisiana and the descendants of the French and French Creoles in Louisiana. I'm not offended by the changes back as I realise that it was in bad judgement and not based on practice as in Louisiana. Vivre la langue française dans la Louisiane!Nintala (talk) 00:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Good, thanks! --Skb8721 (talk) 16:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Lincoln's 100-year trip
Thanks for making the correction. Don't forget to disable the template, though, by adding tlx at the beginning, like this:. The article is currently a Good Article nominee, and is waiting review. 199.125.109.102 (talk) 03:09, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:RM
WP:RM is just a place for notifying proposed moves. All discussion takes place on the relevant talk pages. 199.125.109.102 (talk) 03:45, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Inauguration of Barack Obama
Thank you for the editorial assistance that you gave to help improve this article. You may want to post the attached contribution notice on your user page. Keep up the good work as we try to take this article to WP:FA.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:29, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I am intending nominate this at WP:FAC in the very near future. How do you feel about this article as a FA?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I had intended to nominate it as my next nominee when my current nominee's judgment has been completed. Do you feel there are problems with the article right now?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:29, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Will you be interested in a co-nom at FAC?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:25, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Please come visit Featured article candidates/Inauguration of Barack Obama and help me address concerns as they arise.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:30, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * O.K. you can remove the image.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Still looking for a map of the parade route.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:21, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you guys giving up on this one?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I notice you are editing, but you are not making any notes on the FAC discussion to show what you have done. Please do so, so that we can monitor progress.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:21, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

←←Do you want to take this to WP:PR and then try again?
 * I have started Peer review/Inauguration of Barack Obama/archive1. I will be continuing to work on the article. Hopefully, over the course of the month while this is at PR we can get it cleaned up enough for FAC.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:25, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The PR finally got some feedback. Come take a look if you get a chance.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:07, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I have renominated at Featured article candidates/Inauguration of Barack Obama/archive2.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:55, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * My next nomination will be Jay Pritzker Pavilion. After that, we can give FAC a shot.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:03, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
 * You can comment at Featured article candidates/Inauguration of Barack Obama/archive4.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:13, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Acadiana to Heart of Acadiana?
Aaron, Please note my below letter to RoyAlcatraz, which I copy below. What do you think of this change?

Roy,

Having my own copy of the resolution that established Acadiana, I don't necessarily disagree with changing "Acadiana" to "Heart of Acadiana," except that no one in practice pays any attention to the resolution -- i.e., no one calls the region the "Heart" of Acadiana (rather, they just say "Acadiana"), and, likewise, no one pays attention to the "and other parishes of similar culture" clause (I paraphrase it), and they thus continue to assert that the region consists of only 22 parishes. But I think there is something to be said for what people do in practice, as opposed to what they should do in practice. So I guess I'd prefer "Acadiana" to "Heart of Acadiana" for these reasons.

Sincerely,

--Skb8721 (talk) 21:34, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Is an edit war going on with the Inauguration of Barack Obama article?
During the course of editing the article, I noticed what looks like a tic-for-tac disagreement going on regarding wikilinks for captions with you another editor. Although wikilinks in captions are framed as as a guideline and not a hard and fast rule, take a look at "Tips for describing pictures" under WP:Captions and work with out a consensus with the other person so that we don't get into WP:OWN, WP:DISRUPT and WP:POINT. → Lwalt ♦ talk 14:53, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I am going to explain myself on the talk page momentarily.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:11, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. → Lwalt ♦ talk 15:15, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Inauguration of Barack Obama Article
About the International attention section - Yes...the section definitely should be split from this article into a new one, with a link back to the main (inauguration) article. In the main article, we need to decide on which information to form the summary. I had in mind to rely on the statement, "Reactions to the Obama inauguration by people from various corners of the world ranged from celebration, praise and jubilation to cautious optimism, reservation and indifference" in part to summarize the content.

My only concern is whether someone will come along and mark the fork containing the international responses for RfD. "International reaction to the Inauguration of Barack Obama" (proposed title for fork) redirects to the Inauguration of Barack Obama article...and I'm don't have any information about prior discussions to create or not create a fork for this section. I'm trying not to unintentionally step on something already decided beforehand at some earlier date. → Lwalt ♦ talk 07:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Copyediting the Obama inauguration article
OK...I did some clean-up of the article, including removing content from the International Attention section to another, existing article (link provided at start of section). More work needs to be done, including addressing all feedback provided by the two FAC reviews. At the earliest, the article can be looked at through the peer review process next week (must wait 14 days after closing the FAC review). Info about peer reviews for biographies can be found here.

Let me know what you think. → Lwalt ♦ talk 16:12, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Reply to message about Obama inauguration article
As for the International section, I simply found an existing article that described reactions to Obama's election from around the world, rather than recreating a different fork that nearly duplicated reactions from others. I did that to avoid the likelihood that someone will suggest deletion of fork. I didn't try to change the article's name to reflect the combination of the comments for both the election and inauguration, although it needs a change to reflect the slight change in content. The content as it stands in the Obama inauguration now still needs work to cut down more of its "grayness" to provide just the highlights of the reaction from all sides. I think the Chinese reaction (censorship) could be retooled in particular.

As for the sentence "Despite the performance described as the "classical‑music equivalent of lip‑syncing," National Public Radio described it as "a transporting moment that moved many with its beauty and calm."

How about this:

National Public Radio described the performance by the quartet as "a transporting moment that moved many with its beauty and calm", while the New York Times called it the "classical‑music equivalent of lip‑syncing." This sentence makes clear that the New York Times mentioned lip synching, not NPR.

OR

National Public Radio described the performance by the quartet as "a transporting moment that moved many with its beauty and calm." This sentence leaves out the reference to lip-synching since it's already mentioned that the performers played along with a recording.

Other thoughts that come to mind:

 * The article still needs a lot of work to make simpler a lot of the sentences (I know ... sometimes, even I tend to be verbose).

 * In the lede, need to cut duplication of content (e.g., same events appear in references about DC schedule and references to Lincoln). May also need to reorder sentences in certain sections to show progression.

 * Content is missing that made Obama a trendsetter as it relates to fundraising - Netroots campaign, esp. grassroots campaign organization to raise funds from millions of small donors using technology (Internet-based social networking (including his MyBarackObama.com social networking site), texting, use of podcasts, YouTube, Twitter, blogging and e-mail, for example). See Items 5 and 9 in Lessons from the Obama campaign, The secrets of Obama's success, Obama's Brain Trust ("The size and scale and sophistication of the Obama enterprise — it's like a multinational corporation compared to the mom-and-pop nonprofits of previous Democratic campaigns....") and A new era for campaign finance: Obama's fundraising record could signal the end of public financing for major candidates. Remember...Facebook also had one of its co-founders take a leave of absence to help run the Obama Facebook site that drove everyday people to the campaign site for donations.

That's all I have for now. Gotta get ready for work and for graduation this weekend. → Lwalt ♦ talk 12:47, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Inauguration of Barack Obama FAC3
Follow along at Featured article candidates/Inauguration of Barack Obama/archive3.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:49, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you understand the finepoints of WP:ALT as mentioned in the current discussion because I need some help?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:12, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:XULA sealshadow.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:XULA sealshadow.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:33, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Acadiana Wiki inivitation
You are invited to add material to the brand new Acadiana Wiki (http://acadiana.wikia.com/wiki/Acadiana_Wiki). Hope to see your contributions there! Falkonry (talk) 01:31, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Acadian Flag
has an incorrect tag for its license. I believe you were the one who uploaded it. Could you change the tag to something new? Thanks--Michael miceli (talk) 21:21, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Cajun woman hulling rice.jpg
File:Cajun woman hulling rice.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Cajun woman hulling rice.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:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 06:23, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Caffery
Aaron, see my note on Amb. Caffery's sexual orientation according to noted historian Antony Beevor. It's in the discussion section for Jefferson Caffery. --Skb8721 (talk) 17:09, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Aaron charles! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 21:27, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Bo Lamar -

Inauguration of Barack Obama FAC4
I could use some assistance responding to the "playing of four Ruffles and flourishes" query at FAC.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:44, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Great news!
After successive improvements to the article, the Inauguration of Barack Obama was promoted to featured article status! 03:25, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

We did it!!!
Thanks for all your efforts. --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:26, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection 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.

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 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. Karanacs (talk) 17:08, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Consistency
Yes, that is better. Thanks. I swapped the ref to http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/top10Profs.jsp?tab=schools_top10 for you. Understand I am truly committed to making all universities in La. (public and private) look as best while keeping neutral POV as possible. Aaron charles (talk) 00:25, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * So does that mean that you are also going to delete all of the degrees listed on the ULL page for this reason like you did on the LA Tech page: removed lists of degrees. Wikipedia is not a directory, do not attempt to list every major, degree, or program offered per Wikipedia:College and university article guidelines? Are you going to delete The university is ... the only UL system campus to receive the latter doctoral distinction and among the top 5% of all U.S. colleges. from the ULL article like you deleted Designated as a Tier 3 National University, Louisiana Tech is the highest ranking academic institution in the University of Louisiana System as per the 2010 U.S. News & World Report college rankings. from the LA Tech article because refactoring rankings is prohibited as academic boosterism per Wikipedia:College and university article guidelines? AllisonFoley (talk) 01:06, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You are telling me that ULL can say that they are the only UL System school classified as a Carnegie RU/H, but LA Tech can't say that they are the only UL System school classified as a Tier 3 National Research University by USNWR? There is no difference between the two. The USNWR Tier classification system is much more common and has much greater widespread usage. The average Joe has never heard of the Carnegie system, but everybody knows what a USNWR Tier is. Also, since Tech is known as an "engineering school," I find it ridiculous that you think Tech's various engineering disciplines can't be posted on Wikipedia. I also find it notable that LA Tech has the only nanosystems engineering program in the world, and that can't be posted. But you have no problem with posting stuff like "UL Lafayette is recognized for numerous fields of study such as Environmental Science, Computer Science, Industrial Design, Francophone Studies, Engineering, Visual Arts, Music, Biological Science and Nursing. It offers Louisiana's only PhD in Francophone Studies, Cognitive Science and the only Industrial Design degree in the state of Louisiana." in the ULL intro. Are you going to delete this from the LSU page too? "Additionally, U.S. News & World Report ranked LSU as the 16th most popular university in the nation, placing it ahead of other regional universities such as The University of Texas, The University of Georgia, and The University of Alabama." It looks like you need to bold all of the former names on the ULM page, too. The McNeese page needs policing too: "McNeese is recognized for its excellent engineering program as well as its nursing program. Its creative writing program in English is nationally known for nurturing quality poets and fiction writers.[citation needed] It is the first university in the state of Louisiana to offer a concentration in Forensic Chemistry, and was one of the first schools in the nation to offer a concentration in Terrorism, Preparedness and Security." OMG! Emergency on the Nicholls (I mean, Berekeley on the Bayou) page! "The school is sometimes referred to as "Our Harvard on the Bayou;" the university bookstore even sells shirts sporting this light-hearted nickname. More recently, however, students and faculty have been referring to Nicholls as "Berkeley on the Bayou," because of the university's encouraging atmosphere towards creativity and innovation that goes hand-in-hand with faculty and student engagement." You need to go delete all the degrees on the LSUS and LSUA pages too. AllisonFoley (talk) 04:56, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * AllisonFoley, you are stepping toward making this personal, instead of about the content. I am not sure why because I am helping improve the LA Tech article. If it continues, I will not further respond to you. Also, please do not attempt to give me Wiki assignments.
 * The LA Tech article did not say "only"; it said (1) "Designated as a Tier 3 National University, Louisiana Tech is the highest ranking academic institution in the University of Louisiana System" and (2) '1st': Best public university in Louisiana by Washington Monthly. Those two statements are shameless refactoring of rankings. There is a difference. If you think it should say only Tier 3, I do not see where that's non-compliant with the WG.
 * You wrote: "I also find it notable that LA Tech has the only nanosystems engineering program in the world, and that can't be posted". The article still says "became the first in the world to award a bachelor's of science in Nanosystems engineering." I did not significantly alter or delete that; only suggested it should cite a source.
 * As for the other all the other university articles that you mention, yes, I agree that they, too, can use some clean up. Aaron charles (talk) 05:31, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * If you are "improving" the LA Tech article and believe that a simple rewording would make it compliant, why completely delete an important LA Tech classification instead of just editing it? You find it ok to have this: "Chemical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Electrical & Computer Engineering, Engineering & Technology, Industrial Technology, Mechanical Engineering, Petroleum Engineering ,Telecommunications Engineering" listed on ULL's page, but you completed deleted every discipline on the LA Tech page. You did not make a rebuttal to the academic boosterism I pointed out in the ULL article, so I deleted it. And I'm not giving you wiki assignments, just making a point. I couldn't care less what those pages say. AllisonFoley (talk) 06:17, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Louisiana's Ragin' Cajuns
I'm taking a break from closing at RM. I know that there is a backlog, but hopefully some other administrators will step in and clean out the backlog. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:14, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Campus Ambassadors wanted at LSU
Hi! I'm leaving you this message because you are listed as a Wikipedian in Louisiana. The Wikipedia Ambassador Program is currently looking for Campus Ambassadors to help with Wikipedia assignments at Louisiana State University, which will be participating in the Public Policy Initiative for the Spring 2011 semester. The role of Campus Ambassadors will be to provide face-to-face training and support for students on Wikipedia-related skills (how to edit articles, how to add references, etc.). This includes doing in-class presentations, running workshops and labs, possibly holding office hours, and in general providing in-person mentorship for students.

Prior Wikipedia skills are not required for the role, as training will be provided for all Campus Ambassadors (although, of course, being an experienced editor is a plus).

If you live near Baton Rouge and you are interested in being a Wikipedia Campus Ambassador, or know someone else from the area who might be, please email me or leave a message on my talk page.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:07, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.

For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:58, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of people associated with Hurricane Katrina

The article List of people associated with Hurricane Katrina has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * List is impossible to complete, has arbitrary inclusion criteria, is a repository of loosely associated topics, and is probably better served with a category

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 20:05, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Hurricane Katrina works
Category:Hurricane Katrina works, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 13:46, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
--Kumioko (talk) 02:23, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 18:35, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

About the UL Lafayette seal
Hi, thank you for uploading the seal of UL Lafayette! I got some suggestions for your reference. If possible, could you upload a new PNG file with transparent background? Because you know this image will be also used in some other places, such as Facebook community page for UL Lafayette "http://www.facebook.com/pages/University-of-Louisiana-at-Lafayette/112787412070610", perhaps transparent background will be more elegant. And for better display quality, I guess you could upload a image with larger size (larger than 500px x 500px), and then set the actual display size on Wiki page to 200px in the Infobox, like this: |image =. This is the common way used in Wiki pages of other universities. Thanks! --Rzhang313 (talk) 19:20, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

License tagging for File:ULLRaginCajuns.png
Thanks for uploading File:ULLRaginCajuns.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 21:06, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Theta Xi coat of arms.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Theta Xi coat of arms.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 05:31, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: first inauguration of Barack Obama
This is a note to let the main editors of first inauguration of Barack Obama know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on January 20, 2013. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/January 20, 2013. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director or his delegates, , and , or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you can change it—following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

The first inauguration of Barack Obama as the 44th President of the United States took place on January 20, 2009. The inauguration marked the commencement of the first four-year term of Barack Obama as President and Joe Biden as Vice President. "A New Birth of Freedom", a phrase from the Gettysburg Address, served as the inaugural theme to commemorate the 200th anniversary of the birth year of Abraham Lincoln. In his speeches to the crowds, Obama referred to ideals expressed by Lincoln about renewal, continuity and national unity. The presidential oath as administered to Obama during the ceremony strayed slightly from the form prescribed in the constitution, which led to its re‑administration the next evening. In addition to a larger than usual celebrity attendance at the inauguration, the Presidential Inaugural Committee increased its outreach to ordinary citizens to encourage greater participation in inaugural events compared with participation in recent past inaugurations. Events included a first-ever Neighborhood Inaugural Ball with free or affordable tickets for ordinary citizens. UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Precious
  Louisiana

Thank you for quality articles related to Louisiana places and people, such as Louisiana–Lafayette Ragin' Cajuns and List of Louisiana state symbols, and for excellent copy-editing, such as First inauguration of Barack Obama, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:44, 24 January 2013 (UTC) A year ago, you were the 375st recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:02, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

--Thank you, I had not been logged in for some time.Aaron charles (talk) 05:02, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

 * Three years ago, you were recipient no. 375 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:55, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Aaron charles (talk) 23:47, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

 * Now seven ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:40, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Category:Places affected by Hurricane Katrina
Category:Places affected by Hurricane Katrina, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 05:43, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:Events affected by Hurricane Katrina
Category:Events affected by Hurricane Katrina, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 05:34, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Creole girls.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Creole girls.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ALH (talk) 03:40, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:UL Lafayette Ragin' Cajuns Logo.png
Thank you for uploading File:UL Lafayette Ragin' Cajuns Logo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 11:23, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Louisiana Ragin Cajuns primary logo.png

A tag has been placed on File:Louisiana Ragin Cajuns primary logo.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Corkythe  hornetfan  02:04, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Flag of Acadiana.svg

A tag has been placed on File:Flag of Acadiana.svg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 22:34, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

University of Louisiana at Lafayette
You've been around a good long while so rather than template you I'll just note that with your three quick edits to remove "ULL" from the article intro, you're ignoring an active discussion on that very subject on the Talk page, and are on the verge of a 3RR violation. I hope that, rather than make the change a 4th time, you'll comment at Talk. Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 21:59, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

 * The Talk Page says "There are disagreement about whether UL can be included in the lead" It is not a discussion per se about ULL, which has long not been an abbreviation of the university and long not listed on the Wikipedia page. Aaron charles (talk) 23:27, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

 * It was abundantly clear after the first revert of your edit, accompanied by an edit summary with a pointer to the Talk page, that "ULL" was, or would be, as much a matter for discussion as "UL". Please don't Wikilawyer; it needlessly wastes time and energy.  Thanks.  JohnInDC (talk) 23:52, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

 * Thanks for acknowledging that there was not a discussion about ULL and adding it to the UL Talk Page. Aaron charles (talk) 00:47, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

 * Well, it wasn't hard. Anyone could have done it.  JohnInDC (talk) 01:48, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:UL Lafayette Ragin' Cajuns Logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:UL Lafayette Ragin' Cajuns Logo.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Corkythe hornetfan  (ping me) 18:53, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:UL Lafayette academic logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:UL Lafayette academic logo.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Corkythe hornetfan  (ping me) 19:29, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:UL-seal-for-Wiki.png
 Thanks for uploading File:UL-seal-for-Wiki.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Corkythe hornetfan  (ping me) 19:29, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

2019 US Banknote Contest
Sent by ZLEA at 23:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:35, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Tulane University in popular culture for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tulane University in popular culture is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Tulane University in popular culture until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:02, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

title: User talk:Aaron charles


text:
User talk:Shellofsnail

Welcome
Hi and welcome to wikipedia. I hope you like it and decide to stay. Here are some handy links for newcomers. Also you can sign your name on talk pages and vote pages with three tildes like this ~~~, and your name with a time stamp with four like this ~~~~. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page.Howabout1 Talk to me! 20:48, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Welcome
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Help pages
 * Village pump
 * Help desk
 * Wiquette
 * Merge

Image copyright problem with Image:Sichah1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Sichah1.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:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 15:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Uteotwss1b.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Uteotwss1b.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 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. Videmus Omnia Talk  05:37, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Andy-gross.jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:Andy-gross.jpeg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 02:09, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Steve-customer-service.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Steve-customer-service.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:17, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:GermanyKent.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:GermanyKent.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:15, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:E'Shun Melvin.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:E'Shun Melvin.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:22, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Possibly unfree files
Some of the files that you have uploaded may be unfree. See Possibly unfree files/2014 March 8 for details. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:53, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

October 2019
Hello Shellofsnail. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are  required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Shellofsnail. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. MrOllie (talk) 13:02, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of E'Shun Melvin for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article E'Shun Melvin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/E'Shun Melvin until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article. Ploni (talk) 11:36, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:Shellofsnail


text:
User talk:Danjackson7

Welcome
Hi and welcome to wikipedia. I hope you like it and decide to stay. Here are some handy links for newcomers. Also you can sign your name on talk pages and vote pages with three tildes like this ~~~, and your name with a time stamp with four like this ~~~~. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page.Howabout1 Talk to me! 20:48, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Welcome
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Help pages
 * Village pump
 * Help desk
 * Wiquette
 * Merge

Your articles
Hi; I've moved your articles (Kaitlin Christine Jackson and Briana Lee Jackson) into your User: space, so that both are now located at User:Danjackson7/Kaitlin Christine Jackson and User:Danjackson7/Briana Lee Jackson respectively. If I had not done so, these articles would have been deleted; reason being, articles about your unquestionably non-notable daughters do not belong in Wikipedia. By moving the articles into your User space, I've given you the chance to redact or delete as you see fit. The article's previous titles currently redirect to their new titles, but I will eventually (~24 hours from now) delete the redirects too.

Please see Vanity page for more information on why writing articles about your family members is generally a bad idea. Also see User page to read up on the proper use of your user pages. Although I've been generous in moving your unencyclopedic articles into your user space, you should not take this to mean your Wikipedia user account is akin to a free hosting service. For more information on contributing here, please see our welcome page. Thanks. -- Hadal 03:18, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Your articles, pt. 2
Hello! To elaborate on what was said above, any personal information should be restricted to the user page; click on the link Hadal has kindly offered above to see what is appropriate. I'm a relative newcomer here, and it can be very challenging to thrash out what to do and what not to do (as well as what Wikipedia is and is not) but please contribute to editing or creating noteworthy articles. Welcome! NickBurns 03:32, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:KCJ.JPG
Thank you for uploading Image:KCJ.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. MER-C 10:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:BLJ.JPG
Thank you for uploading Image:BLJ.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. MER-C 10:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Danjackson7


text:
User talk:FireFly~enwiki

Welcome
Hi and welcome to wikipedia. I hope you like it and decide to stay. Here are some handy links for newcomers. Also you can sign your name on talk pages and vote pages with three tildes like this ~~~, and your name with a time stamp with four like this ~~~~. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page.Howabout1 Talk to me! 20:49, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Welcome
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Help pages
 * Village pump
 * Help desk
 * Wiquette
 * Merge

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called FireFly. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name FireFly~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:53, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 12:54, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:FireFly~enwiki


text:
User talk:AmieJonson

Welcome
Hi and welcome to wikipedia. I hope you like it and decide to stay. Here are some handy links for newcomers. Also you can sign your name on talk pages and vote pages with three tildes like this ~~~, and your name with a time stamp with four like this ~~~~. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page.Howabout1 Talk to me! 20:49, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Welcome
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Help pages
 * Village pump
 * Help desk
 * Wiquette
 * Merge

title: User talk:AmieJonson


text:
Talk:Columbina

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 14 January 2020 and 29 April 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mlee1260, GWULindsey. Peer reviewers: Ariellenoam99.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:19, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dtmckell95.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:05, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Proper form
Shouldn't this be at 'Columbine' in English. I only have a vague recollection of the name from the role in opera, so there is every chance I've actually come across the French or Italian usage. 'Columbine Opera' gets far more google hits than 'Columbina Opera'. -- Solipsist 20:49, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

I think this page is more about the commedia Del'arte stock character rather than a particular opera role. I'll be editing this page and cleaning it up. Yes. Columbine is the english version, but Columbina (or Colombina) is the proper "form" - if you will - for Commedia references. Bebedebroadway 15:05, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Colombina & Arlecchino
The following entry under 'Columbina' (Colombina) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbina is not entirely correct:

"In the verismo opera Pagliacci by Ruggiero Leoncavallo, the head troup's wife, Nedda, plays as Colombina, cheating on her husband both onstage and offstage with Arlecchino."

Nedda does not cheat on her husband Canio offstage with the character Arlecchino (in the opera, the actor Beppe). She has taken a lover named Silvio (baritone) probably a local villager in northern Calabria where the action takes place.

Alicia Alexander 15:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Errors
There's a lot that's wrong with this article.

First, the name. I don't know what the writer above means by declaring that "Columbina" is "the proper 'form'--if you will--for Commedia references." The Commedia dell'Arte doesn't exist--and never has existed--as some sort of abstract phenomenon unconnected to nationality. Columbine is "Columbine" in English-speaking countries, "Colombine" in French-speaking countries, and "Colombina" in Italy. As the wag who has doctored note 2 of the page correctly points out, she is never "Columbina" anywhere.

Second, the role. We're told that she is a "comic servant" who wears "a ragged and patched dress." One look at the accompanying illustration should throw doubt on the latter claim. As a matter of fact, in the early French scenarios of the Comédie-Italienne she is not a servant at all: she is the daughter of the (middle- or upper-middle-class) "heavy" father. (Sand, who did the illustration, was French and knew the French form of the Commedia intimately: thus his Colombine's dress.) True, Columbine is a servant in some scenarios, but it should be specified here which ones.

Third, her relationship vis-à-vis Harlequin and Pierrot. We're told she's Harlequin's "mistress." This is misleading. In pantomime, from the eighteenth-century to the present, she is usually pursued by Harlequin (as Cassander and his servant Pierrot give chase), but she can't properly be said to be his "mistress." And in all of the thousands of Pierrot pieces that I've read, I can name maybe a half-dozen where she appears as the "wife of Pierrot." In many pieces, she eventually comes round and agrees to a marriage to Pierrot at the end, but, in such pieces, she can't be said to be the "wife" of Pierrot.

Fourth, the illustration. It implies strongly that Sand drew (or published) it in 1683--but Sand's Masques et bouffons, where it appears, was published in 1860. Maybe we're meant to think that Sand is drawing Columbine as she was generally costumed in 1683--but, in that case, why is the date so specific? What text or event is it attached to?

I'd make the necessary changes to this page if I had a sufficiently stocked library nearby, but I don't. So can just add a caveat lector here. Beebuk 11:16, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

 * Please feel free to edit the page with the correct information. If you have a source, that would be great too! Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:45, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Where it says "Colombian" should it say Columbine? If so please correct that part of the text.

title: Talk:Columbina


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Historical Jesus

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep and cleanup. Woohookitty 06:28, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Historical Jesus
Article predominantly duplicates New Testament view on Jesus' life (and other articles about the views of various religious denominations and groups own views) and is also inherently POV (partly due to the title).

 * Delete     20:49, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. 26 articles link to Historical Jesus, not counting forks and talk pages. Unless you plan to do a massive reorganization of all of the articles about Jesus, this one should be left. It's also not clear to me how the title is POV. Pburka 21:33, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The article title is POV because it essentially says "this is the real version of jesus", which many many religious groups are going to dispute.     22:27, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * It's only linked to as much as it is because someone stuck it in a template. -Sean Curtin 06:12, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * I hadn't noticed the template. Thanks for pointing that out. I have withdrawn my vote. Pburka 23:47, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep - As much as they're all redundancies, I'm in agreement with Pburka. You can't just fit all into one article about Jesus, and though this article needs to be re-thought, it doesn't need to be deleted. -mysekurity 21:38, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree it doesn't all fit into Jesus, but that isn't why I put this up for VfD. I put it up for VfD because it is virtually identical to New Testament view on Jesus' life.

 * Keep - Wikipedia has plenty of room for several interpretations of Jesus which could not all fit into one article. -Acjelen 21:43, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree, but this is the same interpretation as at New Testament view on Jesus' life, only with a POV title.     22:27, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I would like to change my vote to Redirect. New Testament view on Jesus' life and Historicity of Jesus cover the necessary material.  As a librarian, I can attest that "historical Jesus" is a frequently seen term, but WP must be careful with articles that are about terms rather than about what the term signifies.  If historical Jesus research deserves an article outside of Jesus and Historicity of Jesus, then it should be titled Historical Jesus research. -Acjelen 20:08, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Strong keep 'Historical Jesus' is the accepted accademic title for Jesus reconstructions - if there are duplications elsewhere i'd suggest merging them here. --Doc (?) 21:51, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Why merge to here? The other article is New Testament view on Jesus' life, which is a more honest title.     22:27, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Not so, the New Testament's view of Jesus, and the actual historical reality are at least arguably divergent. There are certainly plenty of Jesus schollars who would reconstruct Jesus differently from the Jesus offered by the gospels. As I say, 'Historical Jesus' research is the accepted accademic heading for all such work, and is not neccessarily identical to interpretations of the gospels. --Doc (?) 22:34, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree they are definitely divergent, but the problem is that the articles are not, but instead are really little more than duplicates of each other. This is why I have put it up for VfD.     23:14, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

The topic is significant but seeing as how the article has almost no salvageable material, it needs re-writing. Fernando Rizo 20:09, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete and start over Keep. The phrase "historical Jesus" is absolutely significant is used quite frequently in academic circles to refer verifiable historical evidence (or lack thereof) for the existence of Jesus of Nazareth. It needs some work; I would argue that very little of the article in its current form actually deals with the "historical Jesus", but the article space should stay. Fernando Rizo 22:49, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * If you think that little of its current form actually aproaches the title, could you vote delete, so that we can restart the article from scratch?     23:14, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

 * It seems that "Historical Jesus" is a term widely accepted and used and should have space for it's story. However, this article does little to create the story of "Historical Jesus" and the roots of it's movement and beginnings.  Further the article is begun with "This article presents a critical reconstruction..."  I suggest a more encyclopedic approach to the "Historical Jesus."   Rewrite and keep User:Jpmizell 10 July 2005
 * User has 15 prior edits     17:46, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Strong Keep. I never knew about the Gospel of Thomas.  After watching the movie Stigmata this afternoon, I became curious to find out more about this fifth gospel.  There are a few references to "historical Jesus" in the movie, so I also wanted to find out how "historical" Jesus differs from plain old regular Jesus. User:Anonymous 03:42, 11 July 2005 (EDT)
 * Falsely signed edit by User:24.59.1.160, who has ZERO prior edits     08:31, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * This VfD is not about an article on "how the historical jesus is different", the point is that the article implies it is the same, i.e. is essentially just a copy.

 * Delete unless rewritten. Present article is subjective and opinionated. JamesBurns 08:45, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and Cleanup Term is commonly used, per Doc. Xoloz 09:15, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * For the record, I agree with the reasoning of Christopher Parham, given below, and reaffirm my vote, including the suggested cleanup. Xoloz 03:27, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Redundant fork, POV title. Merge into New Testament view on Jesus' life and Historicity of Jesus where relevant, and redirect to the latter.  -Sean Curtin 06:12, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * I have no wish to defend the contents of this article - but the title is valid and quite distinct from those mentioned above. 'The Historical Jesus' is a regular academic title for Jesus reconstructions and even university courses - it is used by believers and revisionists alike (it asks what 'was Jesus really about' and may or may not conclude that this is the same as the NT's view). There is a whole history of scholarship here which could neutrally be recorded in an article. The question of the 'Historicity of Jesus' ('did he exist') is actually seldom debated in mainstream scholarship - and so to merge the mainstream into a peripheral discussion would be POV. --Doc (?) 12:22, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * It is the content which is being VFD'd. Historicity does not concern did he exist but did he exist in the manner in which is described, i.e. did Jesus exist? and if not, was there someone by the same name?     17:25, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

 * OK, this article is rubbish. It says it "presents a critical reconstruction of the Historical Jesus" - well that has no place in an encyclopaedia, as it will always be POV. What, IMHO, should be here is a record of the various critical reconstructions that scholarship has offered over the last 200 years. Not 'did Jesus exist?', but 'what kind of Jesus existed?'. I've simply been arguing that this title deserves an article. I understood Vfd was not the place for articles that had content problems, but for articles that shouldn't exist (that may be a moot point). If this is deleted, I'm willing to write/help a new scholarly article. If it is kept, I'll (help) re-write it - but either solution may take me some time. --Doc (?) 18:09, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and Cleanup This is certainly no redundant fork. Important term widely used. Look at the number of books at Amazon.com that have the term in the title. Properly written, the article would be entirely different in perspective from that of New Testament view on Jesus' life and thus highly valuable. carmeld1 00:03, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * And what of the current content? Should it be deleted or kept?     23:09, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep and Cleanup Despite POV, this article has some definite possibilities. -Tydaj 04:47, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * (again) What of the current content? Should it be deleted or kept?     23:09, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The opening paragraph is good. Childhood and family background needs a lot more than just Biblical reference. One thing I know of is that there is some belief that "Doubting" Thomas was Jesus' twin. It should also mention his name was probably Yeshua (Joshua), but that "Jesus" derives from the Greek transcription "Iesou" (Greek having no equivalent of our "Y" sound, /j/ in IPA). It mentions this briefly toward the end, but this should really be at the beginning of the article. Works and miracles is a bit better about using extra-Biblical info (altho there's some stuff there that doesnt belong in that category). The last two sections are basiclly just rehashing the Biblical account without giving much outside info. Also, it mentions in passing the belief that Jesus was not a historical figure, but doesn't really expound upon it. Something else: I've heard that some scholars think that Nazareth was founded (I believe) around 70 BCE, therefore, as the Nazareth article says, "Such historians argue that Iesou Nazarene was not 'from Nazareth', but rather that his title was 'Nazarene.'" -Tydaj 16:37, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Other stuff: The article opens, "This article presents a critical reconstruction of the Historical Jesus, as based on the four canonical gospels. Other related articles present different descriptions and perspectives of Jesus. The problem is that it should include other material and perspectives than orthodox Christian (whatever that is). Does anybody know where these supposed other articles are? Perhaps a merge may be in order -Tydaj 16:48, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Comment - Basically, that is my point - the article explicitely states it "presents a critical reconstruction of the Historical Jesus, as based on the four canonical gospels". I.e. is a POV fork of New Testament view on Jesus' life.
 * Christian views are already discussed at Religious perspectives on Jesus, and whether he really existed, and/or was similar to the biblical description, is at Historicity of Jesus.
 * So the only thing suitable is to delete it.     17:32, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Hmm, after looking at all the other articles I see what you mean. I don't know much about scholarly approaches to the figure of Jesus, so if the term Historical Jesus really is important, then it should probably be mentioned in Historicity of Jesus. But for now, out of ignorance I shall abstain. -Tydaj 15:37, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Redirect. I was looking for this exact term, but the kind of information I wanted was actually in Historicity of Jesus-    20:08, 14
 * FALSELY SIGNED VOTE. Above user is actually 170.61.20.228 and neither -Kingsley- nor me.     20:19, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep and cleanup. The historicity of a figure and his personal history are two different topics and can be discussed at different pages. As it stands, it appears that the Historicity of Jesus article mostly focuses on sources, which seems reasonable. A biographical-type article, which should exist here, also seems reasonable. Christopher Parham (talk) 21:31, 2005 July 15 (UTC)
 * Merge whatever really is historical to Jesus and Redirect. The main article Jesus is (or must be) about the 'historical' Jesus. Any other POV (including the Christian) should be named as such, as there are obviously several POVs on the subject and thay will not fit all in one article. Nabla 04:46, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Rename to Life of Jesus or similar. Certainly Jesus is important enough to warrant multiple articles with similar content, and I can see the flow of the two is differentiated, but these two (this and Historicity of Jesus) have confusingly similar names. So I propose a name change of some sort. GarrettTalk 10:13, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Rewrite and Cite - There are absolutely no sources cited, and this article, in my opinion, needs to present more viewpoints of prominent scholars before it can claim to be "The" Historical Jesus. I'd like to see Bultmann, Crossan, Funk, Chilton, Smith, and others. --The Thadman 13:45, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and Cleanup I'd prefer the article to provide a disclaimer at the top and more-or-less outline what the term means and the disputes surrounding precisely who the historical Jesus is.  It might also do well to point out "historical Jesus" is usually contrasted with "Biblical Jesus" and the two agree on such-and-such a point and disagree on such-and-such a point, etc. Amicuspublilius 23:05, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, and keep working on it. "The New Testament View of Jesus" necessarily reflects a Christian point of view (if there are different ways Christians interpret the NT, those different interpretations should be provided).  But there are many critical historians and Bible scholars who believe that Jesus existed, draw on the NT as a source, but do a considerable amount of reinterpreting and reconstruction based on their rejection of the supernatural element, and their use of techniques of comparative literature, Biblical archeology, etc.  We need an article that represents this important body of scholarship. Slrubenstein   |  Talk 22:08, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
User talk:Williwonka

Hi, as you can see I've blocked you from editing. The block is permenant on the username, but temporary on the IP.(24 hours as long as you don't try to edit) I personally don't find trolling that bothersome, but it upsets too many people for me to let you get away with it. See you tomorrow. Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 20:50, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Williwonka


text:
Talk:Soviet classic movies

It would be great if someone could write a better explanation for the influence these movies have had on popular culture and language. In fact, an entire article about these movies(rather than just listing them) would be nice. --Pravit 20:50, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

This page doesn't seem to be a list of 'Classic Soviet Films' rather it seems to be a 'stub' of genre films produced in the Soviet Union. Shouldn't it be retited as such? Mike no current user ref but a cinema teacher / lecturer. (14 / 07 / 05)

You can help me make it a real list by adding some more films. :D --Pravit 21:03, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

The entire definition of "classic" is subjective - I'm surprised to see what has been removed... --MacRusgail 17:35, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Move proposal
I think this should be moved to List of Soviet classic movies - it is just that right now and probably doesn't need to be anything else.--Konstable 01:10, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Soviet classic movies


text:
Geometric integrator

In the mathematical field of numerical ordinary differential equations, a geometric integrator is a numerical method that preserves geometric properties of the exact flow of a differential equation.

Pendulum example
We can motivate the study of geometric integrators by considering the motion of a pendulum.

Assume that we have a pendulum whose bob has mass $$m=1$$ and whose rod is massless of length $$\ell=1$$. Take the acceleration due to gravity to be $$g=1$$. Denote by $$q(t)$$ the angular displacement of the rod from the vertical, and by $$p(t)$$ the pendulum's momentum. The Hamiltonian of the system, the sum of its kinetic and potential energies, is

 * $$H(q,p) = T(p)+U(q) = \frac{1}{2}p^2 - \cos q, $$

which gives Hamilton's equations

 * $$(\dot q,\dot p) = (\partial H / \partial p, -\partial H / \partial q ) = (p,-\sin q). \, $$

It is natural to take the configuration space $$Q$$ of all $$q$$ to be the unit circle $$\mathbb S^1$$, so that $$(q,p)$$ lies on the cylinder $$\mathbb S^1\times\mathbb R$$. However, we will take $$(q,p)\in\mathbb R^2$$, simply because $$(q,p)$$-space is then easier to plot. Define $$z(t) = (q(t),p(t))^{\mathrm T}$$ and $$f(z) = (p,-\sin q)^{\mathrm T}$$. Let us experiment by using some simple numerical methods to integrate this system. As usual, we select a constant step size, $$h$$, and for an arbitrary non-negative integer $$k$$ we write $$z_k:=z(kh)$$. We use the following methods.

 * $$ z_{k+1} = z_k + hf(z_k) \, $$ (explicit Euler),

 * $$ z_{k+1} = z_k + hf(z_{k+1}) \, $$ (implicit Euler),

 * $$ z_{k+1} = z_k + hf(q_k,p_{k+1}) \, $$ (symplectic Euler),

 * $$ z_{k+1} = z_k + hf((z_{k+1}+z_k)/2) \, $$ (implicit midpoint rule).

(Note that the symplectic Euler method treats q by the explicit and $$p$$ by the implicit Euler method.)

The observation that $$H$$ is constant along the solution curves of the Hamilton's equations allows us to describe the exact trajectories of the system: they are the level curves of $$p^2/2 - \cos q$$. We plot, in $$\mathbb R^2$$, the exact trajectories and the numerical solutions of the system. For the explicit and implicit Euler methods we take $$h=0.2$$, and z0 = (0.5, 0) and (1.5, 0) respectively; for the other two methods we take $$h=0.3$$, and z0 = (0, 0.7), (0, 1.4) and (0, 2.1). The explicit (resp. implicit) Euler method spirals out from (resp. in to) the origin. The other two methods show the correct qualitative behaviour, with the implicit midpoint rule agreeing with the exact solution to a greater degree than the symplectic Euler method.

Recall that the exact flow $$\phi_t$$ of a Hamiltonian system with one degree of freedom is area-preserving, in the sense that
 * $$\det\frac{\partial\phi_t}{\partial (q_0,p_0)} = 1$$ for all $$t$$.

This formula is easily verified by hand. For our pendulum example we see that the numerical flow $$\Phi_{{\mathrm{eE}},h}:z_k\mapsto z_{k+1}$$ of the explicit Euler method is not area-preserving; viz.,

 * $$\det\frac{\partial}{\partial (q_0,p_0)}\Phi_{{\mathrm{eE}},h}(z_0)

= \begin{vmatrix}1&h\\-h\cos q_0&1\end{vmatrix} = 1+h^2\cos q_0.$$

A similar calculation can be carried out for the implicit Euler method, where the determinant is

 * $$\det\frac{\partial}{\partial (q_0,p_0)}\Phi_{{\mathrm{iE}},h}(z_0)

= (1+h^2\cos q_1)^{-1}.$$

However, the symplectic Euler method is area-preserving:

\begin{pmatrix}1&-h\\0&1\end{pmatrix}\frac{\partial}{\partial (q_0,p_0)}\Phi_{{\mathrm{sE}},h}(z_0) = \begin{pmatrix}1&0\\-h\cos q_0&1\end{pmatrix},$$

thus $$\det(\partial\Phi_{{\mathrm{sE}},h}/\partial (q_0,p_0)) = 1$$. The implicit midpoint rule has similar geometric properties.

To summarize: the pendulum example shows that, besides the explicit and implicit Euler methods not being good choices of method to solve the problem, the symplectic Euler method and implicit midpoint rule agree well with the exact flow of the system, with the midpoint rule agreeing more closely. Furthermore, these latter two methods are area-preserving, just as the exact flow is; they are two examples of geometric (in fact, symplectic) integrators.

Moving frame method
The moving frame method can be used to construct numerical methods which preserve Lie symmetries of the ODE. Existing methods such as Runge-Kutta can be modified using moving frame method to produce invariant versions.

title: Geometric integrator


text:
English Foxhound

The English Foxhound is one of the four foxhound breeds of dog. It is a cousin of the American Foxhound. They are scent hounds, bred to hunt foxes by scent.

Appearance
The breed standards' guidelines for showing English Foxhounds requires them to be 20 - 27 in tall at the withers. The skull is thick and the muzzle is long. The legs are muscular, straight-boned, and the paws are rounded, almost cat-like. The English Foxhound comes in any hound colour.

History
The English Foxhound has been bred for over two hundred years, with the stud books dating back before 1800.

During the British Raj, English Foxhounds were exported to India for the purpose of jackal coursing, though due to the comparatively hotter weather, they were rarely long lived. Foxhounds were preferred for this purpose over greyhounds, as the former was not as fast, and could thus provide a longer, more sporting chase.

Studbooks for the English foxhound have been kept since the 18th century.

title: English Foxhound